Desprez, the Dauphin Editor, observes also, in the same strain, Porro scribit Horatius ad patrem et ad filios Pisones, praesertim vero ad hos.

The family of the Pisos, to whom Horace addresses this Epistle, were called Calpurnii, being descended from Calpus, son of Numa Pompilius, whence, he afterwards stiles them of the Pompilian Blood. Pompilius Sanguis!

10.—THE VOLUME SUCH] Librum persimilem. Liber, observes Dacier, is a term applied to all literary productions, of whatever description. This remark is undoubtedly just, confirms the sentiments of Jason de Nores, and takes off the force of all the arguments founded on Quintilian's having stiled his Epistle LIBER de arte poetica.

Vossius, speaking of the censure of Scaliger, "de arte, sine arte," subsoins sed fallitur, cum [Greek: epigraphaen] putat esse ab Horatio; qui inscipserat EPISTOLAM AD PISONES. Argumentum vero, ut in Epistolarum raeteris, ita in bac etiam, ab aliis postea appositum fuit.



l9.——OFT WORKS OF PROMISE LARGE, AND HIGH ATTEMPT.] Incaeptis gra- nibus plerumque, &c. Buckingham's Essay on Poetry, Roscommon's Essay on Translated Verse, as well as the Satires, and Art Poetique of Boileau, and Pope's Essay on Criticism, abound with imitations of Horace. This passage of our Author seems to have given birth to the following lines of Buckingham.

'Tis not a slash of fancy, which sometimes, Dazzling our minds, sets off the slighted rhimes; Bright as a blaze, but in a moment done; True Wit is everlasting, like the Sun; Which though sometimes behind a cloud retir'd, Breaks out again, and is the more admir'd.

The following lines of Pope may perhaps appear to bear a nearer resemblance this passage of Horace.

Some to Conceit alone their taste confine, And glitt'ring thoughts struck out at ev'ry line; Pleas'd with a work where nothing's just or fit; One glaring chaos, and wild heap of wit.

Essay on Criticism.



49.—-Of th' Aemilian class ] Aemilium circa ludum—literally, near the Aemilian School; alluding to the Academy of Gladiators of Aemilius Lentulus, in whose neighbourhood lived many Artists and Shopkeepers.

This passage also is imitated by Buckingham.

Number and Rhime, and that harmonious found, Which never does the ear with harshness wound, Are necessary, yet but vulgar arts; For all in vain these superficial parts Contribute to the structure of the whole Without a Genius too; for that's the Soul: A Spirit which inspires the work throughout As that of Nature moves the world about.

Essay on Poetry.

Pope has given a beautiful illustration of this thought,

Survey THE WHOLE, nor seek slight faults to find Where nature moves, and rapture warms the mind; In wit, as Nature, what affects our hearts, Is not th' exactness of peculiar parts; 'Tis not a lip, or eye, we beauty call, But the joint force and full result of all. Thus when we view some well-proportion'd dome, (The world's just wonder, and ev'n thine, O Rome!) No single parts unequally surprise, All comes united to th' admiring eyes; No monstrous height, or breadth, or length appear; THE WHOLE at once is bold and regular.

Essay on Criticism.



56.—SELECT, ALL YE WHO WRITE, A SUBJECT FIT] Sumite materiam, &c.

This passage is well imitated by Roscommon in his Essay on Translated Verse.

The first great work, (a task perform'd by few) Is, that yourself may to yourself be true: No mask, no tricks, no favour, no reserve! Dissect your mind, examine ev'ry nerve. Whoever vainly on his strength depends, Begins like Virgil, but like Maevius ends.

* * * * *

Each poet with a different talent writes, One praises, one instructs, another bites. Horace did ne'er aspire to Epick Bays, Nor lofty Maro stoop to Lyrick Lays. Examine how your humour is inclin'd, And which the ruling passion of your mind: Then, seek a Poet who your way does bend, And chuse an Author as you chuse a friend. United by this sympathetick bond, You grow familiar, intimate, and fond; Your thoughts, your words your stiles, your Souls agree, No longer his interpreter, but He.

Stooping to Lyrick Lays, though not inapplicable to some of the lighter odes of Horace, is not descriptive of the general character of the Lyrick Muse. Musa dedit Fidibus Divas &c.

Pope takes up the same thought in his Essay on Criticism.

Be sure yourself and your own reach to know, How far your genius, taste, and learning go; Launch not beyond your depth, but be discreet, And mark that point where sense and dulness meet.

* * * * *

Like Kings we lose the conquests gain'd before, By vain ambition still to make them more: Each might his servile province well command, Would all but stoop to what they understand.



71.—A cunning phrase.] Callida junctura.

Jason de Nores and many other interpreters agree that Horace here recommends, after Aristotle, the artful elevation of style by the use of common words in an uncommon sense, producing at once an air of familiarity and magnificence. Some however confine the expression, callida junctura, to signify compound words. The Author of the English Commentary adopts the first construction; but considers the precept in both senses, and illustrates each by many beautiful examples from the plays of Shakespeare. These examples he has accompanied with much elegant and judicious observation, as the reader of taste will be convinced by the following short extracts.

"The writers of that time had so latinized the English language, that the pure English Idiom, which Shakespeare generally follows, has all the air of novelty, which other writers are used to affect by foreign phraseology.—In short, the articles here enumerated are but so many ways of departing from the usual and simpler forms of speech, without neglecting too much the grace of ease and perspicuity; in which well-tempered licence one of the greatest charms of all poetry, but especially of Shakespeare's poetry, consists. Not that he was always and every where so happy. His expression sometimes, and by the very means, here exemplified, becomes hard, obscure, and unnatural. This is the extreme on the other side. But in general, we may say, that He hath either followed the direction of Horace very ably, or hath hit upon his rule very happily."



76.—THE STRAIT-LAC'D CETHEGI.] CINCTUTIS Cethegis. Jason de Nores differs, and I think very justly, from those who interpret Cinctutis to signify loose, bare, or naked—EXERTOS & NUDOS. The plain sense of the radical word cingo is directly opposite. The word cinctutis is here assumed to express a severity of manners by an allusion to an antique gravity of dress; and the Poet, adds de Nores, very happily forms a new word himself, as a vindication and example of the licence he recommends. Cicero numbers M. Corn. Cethegus among the old Roman Orators; and Horace himself again refers to the Cethegi in his Epistle to Florus, and on the subject of the use of words.

Obscurata diu papula bonus eruet, atque Proseret in lucem speciosa vocabula rer*um; ***need a Latin speaker to check this out*** Quae priscis memorata CATONIBUS atque CETHEGIS, Nunc situs informis premit & deserta vetustas; Adsciscet nova quae genitor produxerit usus.

Mark where a bold expressive phrase appears, Bright thro' the rubbish of some hundred years; Command old words that long have slept, to wake, Words, that wife Bacon, or brave Raleigh spake; Or bid the new be English, ages hence, For Use will father what's begot by Sense.

POPE.

This brilliant passage of Pope is quoted in this place by the author of that English Commentary, who has also subjoined many excellent remarks on the revival of old words, worthy the particular attention of those who cultivate prose as well as poetry, and shewing at large, that "the riches of a language are actually increased by retaining its old words: and besides, they have often a greater real weight and dignity, than those of a more fashionable cast, which succeed to them. This needs no proof to such as are versed in the earlier writings of any language."—"The growing prevalency of a very different humour, first catched, as it should seem, from our commerce with the French Models, and countenanced by the too scrupulous delicacy of some good writers amongst ourselves, bad gone far towards unnerving the noblest modern language, and effeminating the public taste."—"The rejection of old words, as barbarous, and of many modern ones, as unpolite," had so exhausted the strength and stores of our language, that it was high time for some master-hand to interpose, and send us for supplies to our old poets; which there is the highest authority for saying, no one ever despised, but for a reason, not very consistent with his credit to avow: rudem esse omnino in nostris poetis, aut inertissimae nequitiae est, aut fastidii delicatissimi.— Cic. de fin. 1. i. c. 2.

[As woods endure, &c.] Ut silvae foliis, &c. Mr. Duncombe, in his translation of our Author, concurs with Monsieur Dacier in observing that "Horace seems here to have had in view that fine similitude of Homer in the sixth book of the Iliad, comparing the generations of men to the annual succession of leaves.

[Greek: Oipaeer phyllon genehn, toiaede ch ahndron. phylla ta mehn t anemohs chamahdis cheei, ahllah de thula Taeletheasa phyei, earos depigigyel(*)ai orae Oz andron genen. aemen phnei, aeh dahpolaegei.]

"Like leaves on trees the race of man is found, Now green in youth, now withering on the ground; Another race the following spring supplies, They fall successive, and successive rise: So generations in their turns decay; So flourish these, when those are past away."

The translator of Homer has himself compared words to leaves, but in another view, in his Essay on Criticism.

Words are like leaves; and where they most abound, Much fruit of sense beneath is rarely found.

In another part of the Essay he persues the same train of thought with Horace, and rises, I think, above his Master.

Short is the date, alas, of modern rhymes, And 'tis but just to let them live betimes. No longer now that golden age appears, When Patriarch-wits surviv'd a thousand years; Now length of Fame (our second life) is lost, And bare threescore is all ev'n that can boast; Our sons their father's failing language see, And such as Chaucer is, shall Dryden be. So when the faithful pencil has design'd Some bright idea of the Master's mind, Where a new world leaps out at his command, And ready Nature waits upon his hand; When the ripe colours soften and unite, And sweetly melt into just shade and light; When mellowing years their full perfection give, And each bold figure just begins to live; The treach'rous colours the fair art betray, And all the bright creation fades away!

Essay an Criticism.



95.—WHETHER THE SEA, &c.] Sive receptus, &c.

This may be understood of any harbour; but it is generally interpreted to refer to the Portus Julius, a haven formed by letting in the sea upon the Lucrine Lake, and forming a junction between that and the Lake Avernus; a work, commenced by Julius Caesar, and compleated by Augustus, or Agrippa under his auspices. Regis opus! Both these lakes (says Martin) were in Campania: the former was destroyed by an earthquake; but the latter is the present Lago d'Averno. Strabo, the Geographer, who, as well as our Poet, was living at the time, ascribes this work to Agrippa, and tells us that the Lucrine bay was separated from the Tyrrhene sea by a mound, said to have been first made by Hercules, and restored by Agrippa. Philargyrius says that a storm arose at the time of the execution of this great work, to which Virgil seems to refer in his mention of this Port, in the course of his Panegyrick on Italy in the second Georgick.

An memorem portus Lucrinoque addita claustra, Atque indignatem magnis strideribus aequor, Julia qua ponto longe sonat unda refuso, Tyrrbenusque fretis immittitur aeflut AVERNIS?

Or shall I praise thy Ports, or mention make Of the vast mound, that binds the Lucrine Lake? Or the disdainful sea, that, shut from thence, Roars round the structure, and invades the fence; There, where secure the Julian waters glide, Or where Avernus' jaws admit the Tyrrhene tide? DRYDEN.



98.—WHETHER THE MARSH, &c. Sterilisve Palus.]

THE PONTINE MARSH, first drained by the Consul Cornelius Cethegus; then, by Augustus; and many, many years after by Theodorick.



102.—OR IF THE RIVER, &c.] Sen cursum, &c. The course of the Tyber, changed by Augustus, to prevent inundations.



110.—FOR DEEDS OF KINGS, &c.] Res gestae regumque, &c.

The ingenious author of the English Commentary, to whom I have so often referred, and to whom I must continue to refer, has discovered particular taste, judgement, and address, in his explication of this part of the Epistle. runs thus.

"From reflections on poetry, at large, he proceeds now to particulars: the most obvious of which being the different forms and measures of poetick composition, he considers, in this view, [from v. 75 to 86] the four great species of poetry, to which all others may be reduced, the Epick, Elegiack, Dramatick, and Lyrick. But the distinction of the measure, to be observed in the several species is so obvious, that there can scarcely be any mistake about them. The difficulty is to know [from v. 86 to 89] how far each may partake of the spirit of the other, without destroying that natural and necessary difference, which ought to subsist betwixt them all. To explain this, which is a point of great nicety, he considers [from v. 89 to 99] the case of Dramatick Poetry; the two species of which are as distinct from each other, as any two can be, and yet there are times, when the features of the one will be allowed to resemble those of the other.—But the Poet had a further view in choosing this instance. For he gets by this means into the main of his subject, which was Dramatick Poetry, and, by the most delicate transition imaginable, proceeds [from 89 to 323] to deliver a series of rules, interspersed with historical accounts, and enlivened by digressions, for the regulation of the Roman stage."

It is needless to insist, that my hypothesis will not allow me to concur entirely in the latter part of this extract; at least in that latitude, to which; the system of the writer carries it: yet I perfectly agree with Mr. Duncombe, that the learned Critick, in his observations on this Epistle, "has shewn, in general, the connection and dependence of one part with another, in a clearer light than any other Commentator." His shrewd and delicate commentary is, indeed, a most elegant contrast to the barbarous analysis of Scaliger, drawn up without the least idea of poetical transition, and with the uncouth air of a mere dry logician, or dull grammarian. I think, however, the Order and Method, observed in this Epistle, is stricter than has yet been observed, and that the series of rules is delivered with great regularity; NOT enlivened by digressions, but passing from one topick to another, by the most natural and easy transitions. The Author's discrimination of the different stiles of the several species of poetry, leads him, as has been already shewn, to consider the diction of the Drama, and its accommodation to the circumstances and character of the Speaker. A recapitulation of these circumstances carries him to treat of the due management of characters already known, as well as of sustaining those that are entirely original; to the first of which the Poet gives the preference, recommending known characters, as well as known subjects: And on the mention of this joint preference, the Author leaves further consideration of the diction, and slides into discourse upon the fable, which he continues down to the 152d verse.

Atque ita mentitur, sic veris falsa remiscet, Primo ne medium, medio ne discrepet imum.

Having dispatched the fable, the Poet proceeds, and with some Solemnity of Order, to the consideration of the characters; not in regard to suitable diction, for of that he has already spoken, but in respect to the manners; and, in this branch of his subject, he has as judiciously borrowed from the Rhetoricks of Aristotle, as in the rest of his Epistle from the Poeticks. He then directs, in its due place, the proper conduct of particular incidents of the fable; after which he treats of the chorus; from whence he naturally falls into the history of theatrical musick; which is, as naturally, succeeded by an account of the Origin of the Drama, itself, which the Poet commences, like master Aristotle, even from the Dithyrambick Song, and carries it down to the establishment of the New Greek Comedy; from whence he passes easily and gracefully, to the Roman stage, acknowledging the merits of the Writers, but pointing out their defects, and assigning the causes. He then subjoins a few general observations, and concludes his long discourse on the drama, having extended it to 275 lines. This discourse, together with the result of all his reflections on Poets and Poetry, he then applies in the most earnest and personal manner to the elder Piso; and with a long and most pathetick peroration, if I may adopt an oratorical term, concludes the Epistle.



116.—THE ELEGY'S SMALL SONG.] EXIGUOS Elegos.

Commentators differ concerning the import of this expression—exiguos _Elegos_, the _Elegy's_ small _song_. De Nores, Schrevelius, and Desprez, think it refers to the humility of the elegiack stile and subjects, compared with epick or lyrick sublimity. Monsieur Dacier rather thinks that Horace refers here, as in the words _Versibus impariter junctis,_ "Couplets unequal," to the use of pentameter, or short verse, consisting of five feet, and joined to the hexameter, or long verse, of six. This inequality of the couplet Monsieur Dacier justly prefers to the two long Alexandrines of his own country, which sets almost all the French poetry, Epick, Dramatick, Elegiack, or Satyrick, to the tune of Derry Down. In our language, the measures are more various, and more happily conceived. Our Elegy adopts not only _unequal couplets_, but _alternate rhymes_, which give a plaintive tone to the heroick measure, and are most happily used in Gray's beautiful _Elegy in a Country Church yard.



135.—THY FEAST, THYESTES!] Caena Thyestae.

The story of Thyestes being of the most tragick nature, a banquet on his own children! is commonly interpreted by the Criticks, as mentioned by Horace, in allusion to Tragedy in general. The Author of the English Commentary, however, is of a different opinion, supposing, from a passage of Cicero, that the Poet means to glance at the Thyestes of Ennius, and to pay an oblique compliment to Varius, who had written a tragedy on the same subject.

The same learned Critick also takes it for granted, that the Tragedy of Telephus, and probably of Peleus, after-mentioned, point at tragedies of Euripedes, on these subjects, translated into Latin, and accomodated to the Roman Stage, without success, by Ennius, Accius, or Naevius.

One of this Critick's notes on this part of the Epistle, treating on the use of pure poetry in the Drama, abounds with curious disquisition and refined criticism.



150.—They must have passion too.] dulcia sunto. The Poet, with great address, includes the sentiments under the consideration of diction.

—Effert animi motus interprete lingua. Forces expression from the faithful tongue.

Buckingham has treated the subject of Dialogue very happily in his Essay on Poetry, glancing, but not servilely, at this part of Horace.

Figures of Speech, which Poets think so fine, Art's needless varnish to make Nature shine, Are all but Paint upon a beauteous face, And in Descriptions only claim a place. But to make Rage declaim, and Grief discourse, From lovers in despair fine things to force, Must needs succeed; for who can chuse but pity A dying hero miserably witty?



201.——BE NOT YOUR OPENING FIERCE!] Nec sic incipies, Most of the Criticks observe, that all these documents, deduced from the Epick, are intended, like the reduction of the Iliad into acts, as directions and admonition to the Dramatick writer. Nam si in EPOPaeIA, que gravitate omnia poematum generae praecellit, ait principium lene esse debere; quanto magis in tragoedia et comoedia, idem videri debet? says de Nores. Praeceptum de intio grandiori evitaado, quod tam epicus quam tragicus cavere debet; says the Dauphin Editor. Il faut se souvenir qu' Horace appliqae a la Tragedie les regies du Poeme Epique. Car si ces debuts eclatans sont ridicules dans la Poeme Epique, ils le sont encore plus dans la Tragedie: says Dacier. The Author of the English Commentary makes the like observation, and uses it to enforce his system of the Epistle's being intended as a Criticism on the Roman drama. [ xviii] 202—-Like the rude ballad-monger's chant of old] ut scriptor cyclicus olim.] Scriptor cyclicus signisies an itinerant Rhymer travelling, like Shakespeare's Mad Tom, to wakes, and fairs, and market-towns. 'Tis not precisely known who was the Cyclick Poet here meant. Some have ascribed the character to Maevius, and Roscommon has adopted that idea.

Whoever vainly on his strength depends, Begins like Virgil, but like Maevius ends: That Wretch, in spite of his forgotten rhimes, Condemn'd to live to all succeeding times, With pompous nonsense, and a bellowing sound, Sung lofty Ilium, tumbling to the ground, And, if my Muse can thro' past ages fee, That noisy, nauseous, gaping fool was he; Exploded, when, with universal scorn, The Mountains labour'd, and a Mouse was born.

Essay on Translated Verse.

The pompous exordium of Statius is well known, and the fragments of Ennius present us a most tremendous commencement of his Annals.

horrida romoleum certamina pango duellum! this is indeed to split our ears asunder With guns, drums, trumpets, blunderbuss, and thunder!



211.—Say, Muse, the Man, &c.] Homer's opening of the Odyssey. his rule is perhaps no where so chastely observed as in the Paradise Lost. Homer's [Greek: Maenin aeide thea]! or, his [Greek: Andra moi ennepe,Mgsa]! or, Virgil's Arma, Urumque cano! are all boisterous and vehement, in comparison with the calmness and modesty of Milton's meek approach,

Of Man's first disobedience, &c.



2l5.—Antiphates, the Cyclops, &c].- Antiphatem, Scyllamque, & cum Cyclope Charybdim. Stories, that occur in the Odyssey. 218-19—Diomed's return—the Double Egg.]

The return of Diomede is not mentioned by Homer, but is said to be the subject of a tedious Poem by Antimachus; and to Stasimus is ascribed a Poem, called the Little Iliad, beginning with the nativity of Helen.



227.—Hear now!] Tu, quid ego, &c.

This invocation, says Dacier justly, is not addressed to either of the Pisos, but to the Dramatick Writer generally.



229.—-The Cloth goes down.] Aulaea manentis. This is translated according to modern manners; for with the Antients, the Cloth was raised at the Conclusion of the Play. Thus in Virgil's Georgicks;

Vel scena ut versis disceedat frontibus, atque Purpurea intexti tollant aulaea Britanni.

Where the proud theatres disclose the scene; Which interwoven Britons seem to raise; And shew the triumph which their shame displays.

Dryden



230.—Man's several ages, &c.] aetatis cujusque, &c. Jason Demores takes notice of the particular stress, that Horace lays on the due discrimination of the several Ages, by the solemnity with which he introduces the mention of them: The same Critick subjoins a note also, which I shall transcribe, as it serves to illustrate a popular passage in the As you Like It of Shakespeare.

All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and their entrances, And one man in his time plays many parts: His acts being seven ages. At first the infant, Mewling and puking in the nurse's arms: And then, the whining school-boy with his satchel, And shining morning-face, creeping like snail Unwillingly to school. And then, the lover; Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad Made to his mistress' eye-brow. Then, a soldier; Full of strange oaths, and bearded like the pard, Jealous in honour, sudden and quick in quarrel; Seeking the bubble reputation Even in the cannon's mouth. And then, the justice In fair round belly, with good capon lin'd With eyes severe, and beard of formal cut, Full of wise saws and modern instances, And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts Into the lean and flipper'd pantaloon, With spectacles on nose, and pouch on side; His youthful hose well sav'd, a world too wide For his shrunk shank; and his big manly voice, Turning again toward childish treble, pipes, And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all, That ends this strange eventful history, Is second childishness, and mere oblivion, Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.

Animadverti a plerisque hominis aetatem in septem divisam esse partes, infantiam, pueritiam, adolescentiam, juventutem, virilitatem, senectutem, & ut ab illis dicitur, decrepitatem. In hac vero parte nihil de infantiae moribus Horatius, cum nihil ea aetas praeter vagitum habeat proprium, ideoque infantis persona minime in scena induci possit, quod ipsas rerum voces reddere neque dum sciat, neque valeat. Nihil de moribus item hujus aetatis, quam, si latine licet, decrepitatem vocabimus, quae aetas quodammodo infantiae respondet: de juventute autem & adolescentia simul pertractat, quod et studiis, et natura, & voluntate, parum, aut nihil inter se differant. Aristoteles etiam in libris ad Theodectem omisit & pueritiam, & merito; cum minime apud pueros, vel de pueris sit orator habiturus orationem. Ille enim ad hoc ex aetate personarum differentiam adhibet, ut instituat oratorem, quomodo morata uti debeat oratione, id est, eorum moribus, apud quos, & de quibus loquitur, accommodata.

It appears from hence, that it was common for the writers of that time, as well as Shakespeare's Jaques, to divide the life of Man into seven ages, viz. Infancy, Childhood, Puberty, Youth, Manhood, Old Age, and Decrepitude; "which last, (says Denores) in some sort answers to Infancy," or, as Shakespeare expresses it, IS second childishness.

"Before Shakespeare's time," says Warburton, "seven acts was no unusual division of a play, so that there is a greater beauty than appears at first sight in this image." Mr. Steevens, however, informs us that the plays of that early period were not divided into acts at all. It is most probable therefore that Shakespeare only copied the moral philosophy (the Socraticae chartae) of his own day, adapting it, like Aristotle and Horace, to his own purpose; and, I think, with more felicity, than either of his illustrious predecessors, by contriving to introduce, and discriminate, every one of the seven ages. This he has effected by assigning station and character to some of the stages, which to Aristotle and Horace appeared too similar to be distinguished from each other. Thus puberty, youth, manhood, and old age, become under Shakespeare's hand, the lover, the soldier, the justice, and the lean and flipper'd pantaloon; while the natural qualities of the infant, the boy, and the dotard, afford sufficient materials for poetical description.



262.—Thus years advancing many comforts bring, and flying bear off many on their wing.]

Multa ferunt anni venientes commoda secum, multa recedentes adimunt.

Aristotle considers the powers of the body in a state of advancement till the 35th year, and the faculties of the mind progressively improving till the 49th; from which periods they severally decline. On which circumstance, applied to this passage of Horace, Jason de Nores elegantly remarks, Vita enim nostra videtur ad virilitatem usque, qua in statu posita est, quendam quasi pontem aetatis ascendere, ab eaque inde descendere. Whether Addison ever met with the commentary of De Nores, it is perhaps impossible to discover. But this idea of the ascent and declivity of the bridge of human life, strongly reminds us of the delightful vision of mirza.



288.—An actor's part the Chorus should sustain.] Actoris partes Chorus, &c.

"See also Aristotle [Greek*: oes. ooiaet. k. iae.] The judgment of two such critics, and the practice of wise antiquity, concurring to establish this precept concerning the Chorus, it should thenceforth, one would think, have become a fundamental rule and maxim of the stage. And so indeed it appeared to some few writers. The most admired of the French tragic poets ventured to introduce it into two of his latter plays, and with such success that, as one observes, It should, in all reason, have disabused his countrymen on this head: l'essai heureux de M. Racine, qui les [choeurs] a fait revivre dans athalie et dans esther, devroit, il semble, nous avoir detrompez sur cet article. [P. Brumoi, vol. i. p. 105.] And, before him, our Milton, who, with his other great talents, possessed a supreme knowledge of antiquity, was so struck with its use and beauty, as to attempt to bring it into our language. His Sampson Agonistes was, as might be expected, a master- piece. But even his credit hath not been sufficient to restore the Chorus. Hear a late Professor of the art declaring, De Choro nihil disserui, quia non est essentialis dramati, atque a neotericis penitus, et, me judice, merito repudiatur. [Prael. Poet. vol. ii. p. 188.] Whence it hath come to pass that the chorus hath been thus neglected is not now the enquiry. But that this critic, and all such, are greatly out in their judgments, when they presume to censure it in the ancients, must appear (if we look no further) from the double use, insisted on by the poet, For, 1. A chorus interposing, and bearing a part in the progress of the action, gives the representation that probability, [Footnote: Quel avantage ne peut il [le poete] pas tirer d'une troupe d'acteurs, qui remplissent sa scene, qui rendant plus sense la continuite de l'action qui la sont paroitre VRAISEMBLABLE puisqu'il n'est pas naturel qu'elle sa passe sans point. On ne sent que trop le vuide de notre Theatre sans choeurs. &c. [Les Theatre des Grecs. i. p. 105 ] and striking resemblance of real life, which every man of sense perceives, and feels the want of upon our stage; a want, which nothing but such an expedient as the chorus can possibly relieve. And, 2. The importance of its other office [l. 196] to the utility of the representation, is so great, that, in a moral view, nothing can compensate for this deficiency. For it is necessary to the truth and decorum of characters, that the manners, bad as well as good, be drawn in strong, vivid colours; and to that end that immoral sentiments, forcibly expressed and speciously maintained, be sometimes imputed to the speakers. Hence the sound philosophy of the chorus will be constantly wanting, to rectify the wrong conclusions of the audience, and prevent the ill impressions that might otherwise be made upon it. Nor let any one say, that the audience is well able to do this for itself: Euripides did not find even an Athenian theatre so quick-sighted. The story is well known, [Sen. Ep. 115.] that when this painter of the manners was obliged, by the rules of his art, and the character to be sustained, to put a run of bold sentiments in the mouth of one of his persons, the people instantly took fire, charging the poet with the imputed villainy, as though it had been his own. Now if such an audience could so easily misinterpret an attention to the truth of character into the real doctrine of the poet, and this too, when a Chorus was at hand to correct and disabuse their judgments, what must be the case, when the whole is left to the sagacity and penetration of the people? The wiser sort, it is true, have little need of this information. Yet the reflexions of sober sense on the course and occurrences of the representation, clothed in the noblest dress of poetry, and enforced by the joint powers of harmony and action (which is the true character of the Chorus) might make it, even to such, a no unpleasant or unprofitable entertainment. But these two are a small part of the uses of the chorus; which in every light is seen so important to the truth, decorum, and dignity of the tragic scene, that the modern stage, which hath not thought proper to adopt it, is even, with the advantage of, sometimes, the justest moral painting and sublimest imagery, but a very faint shadow of the old; as must needs appear to those who have looked into the ancient models, or, diverting themselves of modern prejudices, are disposed to consult the dictates of plain sense. For the use of such, I once designed to have drawn into one view the several important benefits arising to the drama from the observance of this rule, but have the pleasure to find myself prevented by a sensible dissertation of a good French writer, which the reader will find in the VIII tom. of the History of the Academy of Inscriptions end Belles Lettres.—Or, it may be sufficient to refer the English reader to the late tragedies of Elfrida and Caractacus; which do honour to modern poetry, and are a better apology, than any I could make, for the ancient Chorus.——Notes on the Art of Poetry.

Though it is not my intention to agitate, in this place, the long disputed question concerning the expediency, or inexpediency, of the Chorus, yet I cannot dismiss the above note without some farther observation. In the first place then I cannot think that the judgment of two such Criticks as Aristotle and Horace, can be decisively quoted, as concurring with the practice of wise antiquity, to establish the chorus. Neither of these two Criticks have taken up the question, each of them giving directions for the proper conduct of the Chorus, considered as an established and received part of Tragedy, and indeed originally, as they both tell us, the whole of it. Aristotle, in his Poeticks, has not said much on the subject and from the little he has said, more arguments might perhaps be drawn, in favour of the omission, than for the introduction of the Chorus. It is true that he says, in his 4th chapter, that "Tragedy, after many changes, paused, having gained its natural form:" [Greek transliteration: 'pollha': moiazolas metazalousa ae tragodia epausto, hepei hesche taen heauiaes phusin]. This might, at first sight, seem to include his approbation of the Chorus, as well as of all the other parts of Tragedy then in use: but he himself expressly tells us in the very same chapter, that he had no such meaning, saying, that "to enquire whether Tragedy be perfect in its parts, either considered in itself, or with relation to the theatre, was foreign to his present purpose." [Greek: To men oun epischopein, eiapa echei aedae hae tragodia tois ikanos, ae ou, auto te kath auto krinomenon, kai pros ta theatra, allos logos.]

In the passage from which Horace has, in the verses now before us, described the office, and laid down the duties of the CHORUS, the passage referred to by the learned Critick, the words of Aristotle are not particularly favourable to the institution, or much calculated to recommend the use of it. For Aristotle there informs us, "that Sophocles alone of all the Grecian writers, made the CHORUS conducive to the progress of the fable: not only even Euripides being culpable in this instance; but other writers, after the example of Agathon, introducing Odes as little to the purpose, as if they had borrowed whole scenes from another play."

[Greek: Kai ton chorus de ena dei upolazein tan upochriton. Kai morion einai tch olch, chai sunagonis*e mae osper par Euripidae, all osper para Sophochlei. Tois de loipois ta didomena mallon ta muthch, ae allaes Tragadias esi di o emzolima adchoi, protch arxanto Agrathonos tch toichtch Kai tch diaphsrei, ae aemzot ma adein, ae raesin ex allch eis allo armotteen, ae eteitodion oleos [per. poiaet. ch. iii.]]

On the whole therefore, whatever may be the merits, or advantages of the CHORUS, I cannot think that the judgment of Aristotle or Horace can be adduced as recommendation of it. As to the probability given to the representation, by CHORUS interposing and bearing a part in the action; the Publick, who have lately in a troop of singers assembled on the stage, as a Chorus, during the whole of presentations of Elfrida and Caractacus, are competent to decide for themselves, how far such an expedient, gives a more striking resemblance of human life, than the common usage of our Drama. As to its importance in a moral view, to correct the evil impression of vicious sentiments, imputed to the speakers; the story told, to enforce its use for this purpose, conveys a proof of its efficacy. To give due force to sentiments, as well as to direct their proper tendency, depends on the skill and address of the Poet, independent of the Chorus,

Monsieur Dacier, as well as the author of the above note, censures the modern stage for having rejected the Chorus, and having lost thereby at least half its probability, and its greatest ornament; so that our Tragedy is but a very faint shadow of the old. Learned Criticks, however, do not, perhaps, consider, that if it be expedient to revive the Chorus, all the other parts of the antient Tragedy must be revived along with it. Aristotle mentions Musick as one of the six parts of Tragedy, and Horace no sooner introduces the CHORUS, but he proceeds to the pipe and lyre. If a Chorus be really necessary, our Dramas, like those of the antients, should be rendered wholly musical; the Dancers also will then claim their place, and the pretentions of Vestris and Noverre may be admitted as classical. Such a spectacle, if not more natural than the modern, would at least be consistent; but to introduce a groupe of spectatorial actors, speaking in one part of the Drama, and singing in another, is as strange and incoherent a medley, and full as unclassical, as the dialogue and airs of The Beggar's Opera!



290.—Chaunting no Odes between the acts, that seem unapt, or foreign to the general theme.]

Nec quid medios, &c.

On this passage the author of the English Commentary thus remarks. "How necessary this advice might be to the writers of the Augustan age cannot certainly appear; but, if the practice of Seneca may give room for suspicion, it should seem to have been much wanted; in whom I scarcely believe there is one single instance, of the Chorus being employed in a manner, consonant to its true end and character."

The learned Critick seems here to believe, and the plays under the name of Seneca in some measure warrant the conclusion, that the Chorus of the Roman Stage was not calculated to answer the ends of its institution. Aristotle has told us just the same thing, with an exception in favour of Sophocles, of the Grecian Drama. And are such surmises, or such information, likely to strengthen our prejudices on behalf of the CHORUS, or to inflame our desires for its revival?



292.——LET IT TO VIRTUE PROVE A GUIDE AND FRIEND.]

Ille bonis saveatque, &c.

"The Chorus," says the poet, "is to take the side of the good and virtuous, i. e. is always to sustain a moral character. But this will need some explanation and restriction. To conceive aright of its office, we must suppose the Chorus to be a number of persons, by some probable cause assembled together, as witnesses and spectators of the great action of the drama. Such persons, as they cannot be wholly uninterested in what passes before them, will very naturally bear some share in the representation. This will principally consist in declaring their sentiments, and indulging their reflexions freely on the several events and mistresses as they shall arise. Thus we see the moral, attributed to the Chorus, will be no other than the dictates of plain sense; such as must be obvious to every thinking observer of the action, who is under the influence of no peculiar partialities from affection or interest. Though even these may be supposed in cases, where the character, towards which they draw, is represented as virtuous."

"A Chorus, thus constituted, must always, it is evident, take the part of virtue; because this is the natural and almost necessary determination of mankind, in all ages and nations, when acting freely and unconstrained." Notes on the Art of Poetry.



297.—FAITHFUL AND SECRET.]—Ille tegat commissa.

On this nice part of the duty of the CHORUS the author of the English Commentary thus remarks.

"This important advice is not always easy to be followed. Much indeed will depend on the choice of the subject, and the artful constitution of the fable. Yet, with all his care, the ablest writer will sometimes find himself embarrassed by the Chorus. i would here be understood to speak chiefly of the moderns. For the antients, though it has not been attended to, had some peculiar advantages over us in this respect, resulting from the principles and practices of those times. For, as it hath been observed of the ancient epic Muse, that she borrowed much of her state and dignity from the false theology of the pagan world, so, I think, it may be justly said of the ancient tragic, that she has derived great advantages of probability from its mistaken moral. If there be truth in this reflection, it will help to justify some of the ancient choirs, that have been most objected to by the moderns."

After two examples from Euripides; in one of which the trusty CHORUS conceals the premeditated suicide of Phaedra; and in the other abets Medea's intended murder of her children, both which are most ably vindicated by the Critick; the note concludes in these words.

"In sum, though these acts of severe avenging justice might not be according to the express letter of the laws, or the more refined conclusions of the PORCH or ACADEMY; yet there is no doubt, that they were, in the general account, esteemed fit and reasonable. And, it is to be observed, in order to pass a right judgment on the ancient Chorus, that, though in virtue of their office, they were obliged universally to sustain a moral character; yet this moral was rather political and popular, than strictly legal or philosophic. Which is also founded on good reason. The scope and end of the ancient theatre being to serve the interests of virtue and society, on the principles and sentiments, already spread and admitted amongst the people, and not to correct old errors, and instruct them in philosophic truth."

One of the censurers of Euripides, whose opinion is controverted in the above note, is Monsieur Dacier; who condemns the CHORUS in this instance, as not only violating their moral office, but transgressing the laws of Nature and of God, by a fidelity; so vicious and criminal, that these women, [the Chorus!] ought to fly away in the Car of Medea, to escape the punishment due to them. The Annotator above, agrees with the Greek Scholiast, that the Corinthian women (the Chorus) being free, properly desert the interests of Creon, and keep Medea's secrets, for the sake of justice, according to their custom. Dacier, however, urges an instance of their infidelity in the ION of Euripides, where they betray the secret of Xuthus to Creusa, which the French Critick defends on account of their attachment to their mistress; and adds, that the rule of Horace, like other rules, is proved by the exception. "Besides (continues the Critick in the true spirit of French gallantry) should we so heavily accuse the Poet for not having made an assembly of women keep a secret?" D'ailleurs, peut on faire un si grand crime a un poete, de n'avoir pas fait en sorte qu'une troupe de femmes garde un secret? He then concludes his note with blaming Euripides for the perfidy of Iphigenia at Tauris, who abandons these faithful guardians of her secret, by flying alone with Orestes, and leaving them to the fury of Thoas, to which they must have been exposed, but for the intervention of Minerva.

On the whole, it appears that the moral importance of the CHORUS must be considered with some limitations: or, at least, that the CHORUS is as liable to be misused and misapplied, as any part of modern Tragedy.



300.—The pipe of old.]—Tibi, non ut nunc, &c.

"This, says the author of the English Commentary, is one of those many passages in the epistle, about which the critics have said a great deal, without explaining any thing. In support of what I mean to offer, as the true interpretation, I observe,

"That the poet's intention certainly was not to censure the false refinements of their stage-music; but, in a short digressive history (such as the didactic form will sometimes require) to describe the rise and progress of the true. This I collect, I. From the expression itself; which cannot, without violence, be understood in any other way. For, as to the words licentia and praeceps, which have occasioned much of the difficulty, the first means a freer use, not a licentiousness, properly so called; and the other only expresses a vehemence and rapidity of language, naturally productive of a quicker elocution, such as must of course attend the more numerous harmony of the lyre:—not, as M. Dacier translates it, une eloquence temeraire et outree, an extravagant straining and affectation of style. 2. From the reason of the thing; which makes it incredible, that the music of the theatre should then be most complete, when the times were barbarous, and entertainments of this kind little encouraged or understood. 3. From the character of that music itself; for the rudeness of which, Horace, in effect, apologizes in defending it only on the score of the imperfect state of the stage, and the simplicity of its judges."

The above interpretation of this part of the Epistle is, in my opinion, extremely just, and exactly corresponds with the explication of De Nores, who censures Madius for an error similar to that of Dacier. Non recte sentire videtur Madius, dum putat potius in Romanorum luxuriam invectum horatium, quam de melodiae incremento tractasse.

The musick, having always been a necessary appendage to the Chorus, I cannot (as has already been hinted in the note on I. 100 of this version) confider the Poet's notice of the Pipe and Lyre, as a digression, notwithstanding it includes a short history of the rude simplicity of the Musick in the earlier ages of Rome, and of its subsequent improvements. The Chorus too, being originally the whole, as well as afterwards a legitimate part of Tragedy, the Poet naturally traces the Drama from its origin to its most perfect state in Greece; and afterwards compares its progress and improvements with the Theatre of his own country. Such is, I think, the natural and easy method pursued by Horace; though it differs in some measure from the order and connection pointed out by the author of the English Commentary.



314.—For what, alas! could the unpractis'd ear Of rusticks revelling o'er country cheer, A motley groupe; high, low; and froth, and scum, Distinguish but shrill squeak, and dronish hum? —Indoctus quid enim saperet, liberque laborum, Rusticus urbano confusus, turpis honesto?

These lines, rather breaking in upon the continuity of the history of theatrical musick, create some obscurity, which has given birth, to various interpretations. The author of the English Commentary, who always endeavours to dive to the very bottom of his subject, understands this couplet of Horace as a sneer on those grave philosophers, who considered these refinements of the musick as corruptions. He interprets the passage at large, and explains the above two lines in these words. "Nor let it be objected than this freer harmony was itself an abuse, a corruption of the severe and moral musick of antient times. Alas! we were not as yet so wise, to see the inconveniences of this improvement. And how should we, considering the nature and end of these theatrical entertainments, and the sort of men of which our theatres were made up?"

This interpretation is ingenious; but Jason De Nores gives, I think, a more easy and unforced explanation of this difficult passage, by supposing it to refer (by way of parenthesis) to what had just been said of the original rude simplicity of the Roman theatrical musick, which, says the Poet, was at least as polished and refined as the taste of the audience. This De Nores urges in two several notes, both which I shall submit to the reader, leaving it to him to determine how far I am to be justified in having adapted my version to his interpretation.

The first of these notes contains at large his reproof of Madius for having, like Dacier, supposed the Poet to censure the improvements that he manifestly meant to commend.

Quare non recte videtur sentire Madius, dum putat potius in Romanorum luxuriam invectum Horatium, quam de melodiae incremento tractasse, cum seipsum interpretans, quid fibi voluerit per haec, luce clarius, ostendat,

Tibia non ut nunc orichalco vincta, tubaeque AEmula. Et, Sic priscae motumque, & luxuriam addidit arti Tibicen, traxitque vagus per pulpita vestem: Sic etiam fidibus voces crevere feveris, Et tulit eloquium infolitum fecundia praeceps.

Ad quid enim tam longa digressione extra, rem propositam in Romanos inveberetur, cum de iis nihil aliud dicat, quam eos genio ac valuptatibus indulgere: cum potius veteres Romanos insimulare videatur ionorantiae, quod ignoraverint soni et musices venustatem et jucunditatem, illa priori scilicet incondita et rudi admodum contenti, dum ait; Indoctus quid enim saperet, liberque laborum, Rusticus urbano confusus, turpis honesto?

The other note is expressly applied by way of comment on this passage itself.

[Indoctus quidenim saperet?] Reddit rationem quasiper digressionem, occurrens tacitae objectioni quare antea apud Romanos musica melodia parva aut nulla pene fuerat: quia, inquit, indocti ignarique rerum omnium veteres illi nondum poterant judicare de melodia, utpote apud eos re nova, atque inufitata, neque illius jucunditatem degustare, quibus verbis imperitiam eorum, rusticatatemque demonstrat.

Upon the whole De Nores appears to me to have given the true sense of the passage. I am no friend to licentious transpositions, or arbitrary variations, of an author's text; yet I confess, I was strongly tempted, in order to elucidate his perplexed passage, to have carried these two lines of Horace four lines back, and to have inserted them immediately after the 207th verse.

Et frugi, castus, verecundusque coibat.

The English reader, who wishes to try the experiment, is desired to read the four lines, that compose my version, immediately after the 307th line,

With modest mirth indulg'd their sober taste.



3l8.—The Piper, grown luxuriant in his art.]



320.—Now too, its powers increas'd, The Lyre severe.]

Sic priscae—arti tibicen, &c. sic fidibus, &c.

"This is the application of what hath been said, in general, concerning the refinement of theatrical music to the case of tragedy. Some commentators say, and to comedy. But in this they mistake, as will appear presently. M. Dacier hath I know not what conceit about a comparison betwixt the Roman and Greek stage. His reason is, that the lyre was used in the Greek chorus, as appears, he says, from Sophocles himself playing upon this instrument himself in one of his tragedies. And was it not used too in the Roman chorus, as appears from Nero's playing upon it in several tragedies? But the learned critic did not apprehend this matter. Indeed from the caution, with which his guides, the dealers in antiquities, always touch this point, it should seem, that they too had no very clear conceptions of it. The case I take to have been this: The tibia, as being most proper to accompany the declamation of the acts, cantanti fuccinere, was constantly employed, as well in the Roman tragedy as comedy. This appears from many authorities. I mention only two from Cicero. Quam multa [Acad. 1. ii. 7.] quae nos fugiunt in cantu, exaudiunt in eo genere exercitati: Qui, primo inflatu Tibicinis, Antiopam esse aiunt aut Andromacham, cum nos ne suspicemur quidem. The other is still more express. In his piece entitled Orator, speaking of the negligence of the Roman writers, in respect of numbers, he observes, that there were even many passages in their tragedies, which, unless the TIBIA played to them, could not be distinguished from mere prose: quae, nisi cum Tibicen accesserit, orationi sint solutae simillima. One of these passages is expressly quoted from Thyestes, a tragedy of Ennius; and, as appears from the measure, taken out of one of the acts. It is clear then, that the tibia was certainly used in the declamation of tragedy. But now the song of the tragic chorus, being of the nature of the ode, of course required fides, the lyre, the peculiar and appropriated instrument of the lyric muse. And this is clearly collected, if not from express testimonies; yet from some occasional hints dropt by the antients. For, 1. the lyre, we are told, [Cic. De Leg. ii. 9. & 15.] and is agreed on all hands, was an instrument of the Romon theatre; but it was not employed in comedy, This we certainly know from the short accounts of the music prefixed to Terence's plays. 2. Further, the tibicen, as we saw, accompanied the declamation of the acts in tragedy. It remains then, that the proper place of the lyre was, where one should naturally look for it, in the songs of the chorus; but we need not go further than this very passage for a proof. It is unquestionable, that the poet is here speaking of the chorus only; the following lines not admitting any other possible interpretation. By fidibus then is necessarily understood the instrument peculiarly used in it. Not that it need be said that the tibia was never used in the chorus. The contrary seems expressed in a passage of Seneca, [Ep. ixxxiv.] and in Julius Pollux [1. iv. 15. Sec. 107.] It is sufficient, if the lyre was used solely, or principally, in it at this time. In this view, the whole digression is more pertinent, and connects better. The poet had before been speaking of tragedy. All his directions, from 1. 100, respect this species of the drama only. The application of what he had said concerning music, is then most naturally made, I. to the tibia, the music of the acts; and, 2. to fides, that of the choir: thus confining himself, as the tenor of this part required, to tragedy only. Hence is seen the mistake, not only of M. Dacier, whose comment is in every view insupportable; but, as was hinted, of Heinsius, Lambin, and others, who, with more probability, explained this of the Roman comedy and tragedy. For, though tibia might be allowed to stand for comedy, as opposed to tragoedia, [as in fact, we find it in 1. ii. Ep. I. 98,] that being the only instrument employed in it; yet, in speaking expressly of the music of the stage, fides could not determinately enough, and in contradistinction to tibia, denote that of tragedy, it being an instrument used solely, or principally, in the chorus; of which, the context shews, he alone speaks. It is further to be observed, that, in the application here made, besides the music, the poet takes in the other improvements of the tragic chorus, these happening, as from the nature of the thing they would do, at the same tine. Notes on the Art of Poetry.



3l9.—with dance and flowing vest embellishes his part.]

Traxitque vagus per pulpita vestem.

"This expresses not only the improvement arising from the ornament of proper dresses, but from the grace of motion: not only the actor, whose peculiar office it was, but the minstrel himself, as appears from hence, conforming his gesture in some sort to the music.

"Of the use and propriety of these gestures, or dances, it will not be easy for us, who see no such things attempted on the modern stage, to form any very clear or exact notions. What we cannot doubt of is, 1. That the several theatrical dances of the antients were strictly conformable to the genius of the different species of composition, to which they were applied. 2. That, therefore, the tragic dance, which more especially accompanied the Chorus, must have been expressive of the highest gravity and decorum, tending to inspire ideas of what is becoming, graceful, and majestic; in which view we cannot but perceive the important assistance it must needs lend to virtue, and how greatly it must contribute to set all her graces and attractions in the fairest light. 3. This idea of the ancient tragic dance, is not solely formed upon our knowledge of the conformity before-mentioned; but is further collected from the name usually given to it, which was [Greek transliteration: Emmeleia] This word cannot well be translated into our language; but expresses all that grace and concinnity of motion, which the dignity of the choral song required. 4. Lastly, it must give us a very high notion of the moral effect of this dance, when we find the severe Plato admitting it into his commonwealth. Notes on the Art of Poetry."

326—he who the prize, a filthy goat, to gain, at first contended in the tragick strain. Carmine qui tragico, vilem certavit ob bircum.

If I am not greatly deceived, all the Editors, and Commentators on this Epistle, have failed to observe, that the historical part of it, relative to the Graecian Drama, commences at this verse; all of them supposing it to begin, 55 lines further in the Epistle, on the mention of Thespis; whom Horace as early, as correctly, describes to be the first improver, not inventor of Tragedy, whose original he marks here. Much confusion has, I think, arisen from this oversight, as I shall endeavour to explain in the following notes; only observing this place, that the Poet, having spoken particularly of all the parts of Tragedy, now enters with the strictest order, and greatest propriety, into its general history, which, by his strictures on the chorus, he most elegantly, as well as forcibly, connects with his subject, taking occasion to speak incidentally of other branches of the Drama, particularly the satyre, and the Old Comedy



323—Soon too—tho' rude, the graver mood unbroke, Stript the rought satyrs, and essay'd a joke. Mox etiam agrestes saytros, &c.

"It is not the intention of these notes to retail the accounts of others. I must therefore refer the reader, for whatever concerns the history of the satiric, as I have hitherto done of the tragic and comic drama, to the numerous dissertators on the ancient stage; and, above all, so the case before us, to the learned Casaubon; from whom all that hath been said to any purpose, by modern writers, hath been taken. Only it will be proper to observe one or two particulars, which have been greatly misunderstood, and without which if will be impossible, in any tolerable manner, to explain what follows.

"I. The design of the poet, in these lines, is not to fix the origin of the satyric piece, in ascribing the invention of it to Thespis. This hath been concluded, without the least warrant from his own words, which barely tell us, 'that the representation of tragedy was in elder Greece followed by the satires;' and indeed the nature of the thing, as well as the testimony of all antiquity, shews it to be impossible. For the satire here spoken of is, in all respects, a regular drama, and therefore could not be of earlier date than the times of Aeschylus, when the constitution of the drama was first formed. It is true indeed, there was a kind of entertainment of much greater antiquity, which by the antients is sometimes called satyric, out of which (as Aristotle assures us) tragedy itself arose, [Greek: *illegible] But then this was nothing but a chorus of satyrs [Athenaeus, 1. xiv.] celebrating the festivals of Bacchus, with rude songs and uncouth dances; and had little resemblance to that which was afterwards called satiric; which, except that it retained the chorus of satyrs, and turned upon some subject relative to Bacchus, was of a quite different structure, and, in every respect, as regular a composition as tragedy itself."

"II. There is no doubt but the poem, here distinguished by the name of satyri, was in actual use on the Roman stage. This appeals from the turn of the poet's whole criticism upon it. Particularly, his address to the Pisos, 1. 235 and his observation of the offence which a loose dialogue in this drama would give to a Roman auditory, 1. 248, make it evident that he had, in fact, the practice of his own stage in view."

"III. For the absolute merit of these satires, the reader will judge of it himself by comparing the Cyclops, the only piece of this kind remaining to us from antiquity, with the rules here delivered by Horace. Only it may be observed, in addition to what the reader will find elsewhere [n. 1. 223.] apologized in its favour, that the double, character of the satires admirably fitted it, as well for a sensible entertainment to the wise, as for the sport and diversion of the vulgar. For, while the grotesque appearance and jesting vein of these fantastic personages amused the one, the other saw much further; and considered them, at the same time, as replete with science, and informed by a spirit of the most abstruse wisdom. Hence important lessons of civil prudence, interesting allusions to public affairs, or a high, refined moral, might, with the highest probability, be insinuated, under the slight cover of a rustic simplicity. And from this instructive cast, which from its nature must be very obscure, if not impenetrable, to us at this day, was, I doubt not, derived the principal pleasure which the antients found in this species of the drama. If the modern reader would conceive any thing of the nature and degree of this pleasure, he may in part guess at it, from reflecting on the entertainment he himself receives from the characters of the clowns in Shakespeare; who, as the poet himself hath characterized them, use their folly, like a stalking horse, and, under the presentation of that, shoot their wit." [As you like it.]—Notes on the Art of Poetry. [Footnote: This, and all the extracts, which are quoted, Notes on the Art of Poetry, are taken from the author of the English Commentary. ]

This learned note, I think, sets out with a misapprehension of the meaning of Horace, by involving his instructions on the Satyrick drama, with his account of its Origin. Nor does he, in the most distant manner, insinuate, tho' Dacier has asserted the same thing, that the satyrs owed their first introduction to Thespis; but relates, that the very Poets, who contended in the Goat-Song, to which tragedy owes its name, finding it too solemn and severe an entertainment for their rude holiday audience, interspersed the grave strains of tragedy with comick and satyrical Interludes, producing thereby a kind of medley, something congenial to what has appeared on our own stage, under the name of Tragi-comedy. Nor, if I am able to read and comprehend the context, so the words of Horace tell us, "that the representation of Tragedy was, in 'elder Greece,' followed by the satyrs." The Satyrs composed a part of the Tragedy in its infancy, as well as in the days of Horace, if his own words may be quoted as authority. On any other construction, his directions, concerning* the conduct of the God or Hero of the piece, are scarcely reconcilable to common sense; and it is almost impossible to mark their being incorporated with the Tragedy, in more expressive terms or images, than by his solicitude to prevent their broad mirth from contaminating its dignity or purity.Essutire leves indigna tragaedia versus ut sestis matrona moveri jussa diebus, intererit satyris paulum pudibunda protervis.

The cyclops of Euripides, the only Satyrick drama extant, written at a much later period, than that of which Horace speaks in this place, cannot, I think, convey to us a very exact idea of the Tragick Pastorals, whose origin he here describes. The cyclops, scarce exceeding 700 lines, might be played, according to the idea of some criticks, after another performance: but that cannot, without the greatest violence to the text, be supposed of the Satyrick piece here mentioned by Horace. The idea of farces, or after-pieces, tho' an inferior branch of the Drama, is, in fact, among the refinements of an improved age. The writers of an early period throw their dramatick materials, serious and ludicrous, into one mass; which the critical chymistry of succeeding times separates and refines. The modern stage, like the antient, owed its birth to the ceremonies of Religion. From Mysteries and Moralities, it proceeded to more regular Dramas, diversifying their serious scenes, like the Satyrick poets, with ludicrous representations. This desire of variety was one cause of the agrestes satyros. Hos autem loco chori introductor intelligit, non, us quidam volunt, in ipsa tragoedia, cum praesertim dicat factum, ut grata novitate detinerentur spectatores: quod inter unum & alterum actum sit, chori loco. in tragoedia enim ipsa, cum flebilis, severa, ac gravis sit, non requiritur bujusmodi locorum, ludorumque levitas, quae tamen inter medios actus tolerari potest, & boc est quod ait, incolumi gravitate. Ea enim quae funt, quaeve dicuntur inter medios actus, extra tragordiam esse intelligentur, neque imminuunt tragoedioe gravi*tem.—DE NORES.

The distinction made by De Nores of the satyrs not making a part of the tragedy, but barely appearing between the acts, can only signify, that the Tragick and Comick Scenes were kept apart from each other. This is plain from his laying that they held the place of the Chorus; not sustaining their continued part in the tragick dialogue, but filling their chief office of singing between the acts. The antient Tragedy was one continued representation, divided into acts by the Chant of the CHORUS; and, otherwise, according to modern ideas, forming but one act, without any interruption of the performance.

These antient Satyrick songs, with which the antient Tragedians endeavoured to enliven the Dithyrambicks, gave rise to two different species of poetry. Their rude jests and petulant raillery engendered the Satire; and their sylvan character produced the Pastoral.



328.—THO' RUDE, THE GRAVER MOOD UNBROKE— Stript the rough Satyrs, and ESSAYED A JOKE

—Agrestes Satyros nudavis, & asper, INCOLUMI GRAVITATE, jocum tentavit.

"It hath been shewn, that the poet could not intend, in these lines, to fix the origin of the satiric drama. But, though this be certain, and the dispute concerning that point be thereby determined, yet it is to be noted, that he purposely describes the satire in its ruder and less polished form; glancing even at some barbarities, which deform the Bacchic chorus; which was properly the satiric piece, before Aeschylus had, by his regular constitution of the drama, introduced it under a very different form on the stage. The reason of this conduit is given in n. on l. 203. Hence the propriety of the word nudavit, which Lambin rightly interprets, nudos introduxit satyres, the poet hereby expressing the monstrous indecorum of this entertainment in its first unimproved state. Alluding also to this ancient character of the satire, he calls him asper, i.e. rude and petulant; and even adds, that his jests were intemperate, and without the least mixture of gravity. For thus, upon the authority of a very ingenious and learned critic, I explain incolumi gravitate, i. e. rejecting every thing serious, bidding farewell, as we may say, to all gravity. Thus [L. in. O. 5.].

Incolumi Jove et urbe Roma:

i.e. bidding farewell to Jupiter [Capitolinus] and Rome; agreeably to what is said just before,

Anciliorum et neminis et togae OBLITUS, aeternaeque Vestae.

or, as salvus is used more remarkably in Martial [I. v. 10.]

Ennius est lectus salvo tibi, Roma, Marone: Et sua riserunt secula Maeonidem.

"_Farewell, all gravity, is as remote from the original sense of the words _fare well,_ as _incolumi gravitate_ from that of _incolumis, or salvo Morona_ from that of _salvas._"

Notes on the Art of Poetry.

The beginning of this note does not, I think, perfectly accord with what has been urged by the same Critick in the note immediately preceding; He there observed, that the "satyr here spoken of, is, in all respects, a regular Drama, and therefore could not be of earlier date, than the times of Aeschylus.

Here, however, he allows, though in subdued phrase, that, "though this be certain, and the dispute concerning that point thereby determined,_ yet it is to be noted, _that he purposely describes the satyr_ in its ruder and less polished form; _glancing even at some barbarities, which deform_ the bacchic chorus; which was properly the Satyrick piece, _before_ Aeschylus had, by his regular constitution of the Drama, introduced it, _under a very different form,_ on the stage." In a subsequent note, the same learned Critick also says, that "the connecting particle, _verum, [verum ita risores, &c.]_ expresses the opposition intended between the _original satyr_ and that which the Poet approves." In both these passages the ingenious Commentator seems, from the mere influence of the context, to approach to the interpretation that I have hazarded of this passage, avowedly one of the most obscure parts of the Epistle. The explanation of the words incolumi gravitate, in the latter part of the above note, though favourable to the system of the English Commentary, is not only contrary to the construction of all other interpreters, and, I believe, unwarranted by any acceptation of the word _incolumis,_ but, in my opinion, less elegant and forcible than the common interpretation.

The line of the Ode referred to,

INCOLUMI Jove, et urbe Roma?

was never received in the sense, which the learned Critick assigns to it.

The Dauphin Editor interprets it, STANTE urbe, & Capitolino Jove Romanos protegente. Schrevelius, to the same effect, explains it, SALVO Capitolio, quae Jovis erat sedes.

These interpretations, as they are certainly the most obvious, seem also to be most consonant to the plain sense of the Poet.



330.—For holiday spectators, flush'd and wild, With new conceits and mummeries were beguil'd. Quippe erat ILLECEBRIS, &c.

Monsieur Dacier, though he allows that "all that is here said by Horace proves incontestibly, that the Satyrick Piece had possession of the Roman stage;" tout ce qu' Horace dit icy prouve incontestablement qu'il y avoit des Satyres; yet thinks that Horace lavished all these instructions on them, chiefly for the sake of the atellane fables. The author of the English Commentary is of the same opinion, and labours the point very assiduously. I cannot, however, discover, in any part of Horace's discourse on the satyrs, one expression glancing towards the atellanes, though their oscan peculiarities might easily have been marked, so as not to be mistaken.



335.—That GOD or HERO of the lofty scene, May not, &c. Ne quicumque DEUS, &c.

The Commentators have given various explanations of this precept. _De Nores_ interprets it to signify _that the same actor, who represented a God or Hero in the_ Tragick _part of the Drama, must not be employed to represent a Faun or Sylvan in the_ Satyrick. _Dacier has a strange conceit concerning the joint performance of a _Tragedy_ and _Atellane_ at one time, the same God or Hero being represented as the principal subject and character of both; on which occasion, (says he) the Poet recommends to the author not to debase the God, or Hero of _the_ Tragedy, by sinking his language and manners too low in _the_ atellane; whose stile, as well as measure, should be peculiar to itself, equally distant from Tragedy and Farce.

The author of the English Commentary tells us, that "Gods and Heroes were introduced as well into the Satyrick as Tragick Drama, and often the very same Gods and Heroes, which had born a part in THE PRECEDING TRAGEDY; a practice, which Horace, I suppose, intended, by this hint, to recommend as most regular."

The two short notes of Schrevelius, in my opinion, more clearly explain the sense of Horace, and are in these words.

Poema serium, jocis Satyricis ita commiscere—ne seilicet is, qui paulo ante DEI instar aut herois in scenam fuit introductus, postea lacernosus prodeat.

On the whole, supposing the Satyrick Piece to be Tragi-Comick, as Dacier himself seems half inclined to believe, the precept of Horace only recommends to the author so to support his principal personage, that his behaviour in the Satyrick scenes shall not debase the character he has sustained in the TRAGICK. No specimen remaining of the Roman Satyrick Piece, I may be permitted to illustrate the rule of Horace by a brilliant example from the seroi-comick Histories of the Sovereign of our Drama. The example to which I point, is the character of the Prince of Wales, in the two Parts of Henry the Fourth, Such a natural and beautiful decorum is maintained in the display of that character, that the Prince is as discoverable in the loose scenes with Falstaff and his associates, as in the Presence Chamber, or the closet. after the natural, though mixt dramas, of Shakespear, and Beaumont and Fletcher, had prevailed on our stage, it is surprising that our progress to pure Tragedy and Comedy, should have been interrupted, or disturbed, by the regular monster of Tragi-comedy, nursed by Southerne and Dryden.



346.—LET ME NOT, PISOS, IN THE SYLVIAN SCENE, USE ABJECT TERMS ALONE, AND PHRASES MEAN]

Non ego INORNATA & DOMINANTIA, &c.

The author of the English Commentary proposes a conjectural emendation of Horace's text—honodrata instead of inornata—and accompanied with a new and elevated sense assigned to the word dominantia. This last word is interpreted in the same manner by _de Nores_. Most other Commentators explain it to signify _common words_, observing its analogy to the Greek term [Greek: kuria]. The same expression prevails in our own tongue—_a_ reigning _word_, _a reigning _fashion_, &c. the general cast of _the_ satyr, seems to render a caution against a lofty stile not very necessary; yet it must be acknowledged that such a caution is given by the Poet, exclusive of the above proposed variation.

Ne quicumque DEUS——— Migret in obscuras HUMILI SERMONE tabernas, Aut dum vitat humum, NUBES & INANIA CAPTET.



350.—Davus may jest, &c.]—Davusne loquatur, &c.

It should seem from hence, that the common characters of Comedy, as well as the Gods and Heroes of Tragedy, had place in the Satyrick Drama, cultivated in the days of Horace. Of the manner in which the antient writers sustained the part of Silenus, we may judge from the CYCLOPS of Euripides, and the Pastorals of Virgil.

Vossius attempts to shew from some lines of this part of the Epistle, [Ne quicumque Deus, &c.] that the satyrs were subjoined to the Tragick scenes, not incorporated with them: and yet at the same moment he tells us, and with apparent approbation, that Diomedes quotes our Poet to prove that they were blended with each other: simul ut spectator, inter res tragicas, seriasque, satyrorum quoque jocis, & lusibus, delectaretur.

I cannot more satisfactorily conclude all that I have to urge, on the subject of the Satyrick Drama, as here described by Horace, than by one more short extract from the notes of the ingenious author of the English Commentary, to the substance of which extract I give the most full assent. "The Greek Drama, we know, had its origin from the loose, licentious raillery of the rout of Bacchus, indulging to themselves the freest follies of taunt and invective, as would best suit to lawless natures, inspirited by festal mirth, and made extravagant by wine. Hence arose, and with a character answering to this original, the Satiric Drama; the spirit of which was afterwards, in good measure, revived and continued in the Old Comedy, and itself preferred, though with considerable alteration in the form, through all the several periods of the Greek stage; even when Tragedy, which arose out of it, was brought to its last perfection."



368.—To a short syllable, a long subjoin'd, Forms an IAMBICK FOOT.] Syllaba longa, brevi subjetta, vocatur Iambus.

Horace having, after the example of his master Aristotle, slightly mentioned the first rise of Tragedy in the form of a Choral Song, subjoining an account of the Satyrick Chorus, that was soon (mox etiam) combined with it, proceeds to speak particularly of the Iambick verse, which he has before mentioned generally, as the measure best accommodated to the Drama. In this instance, however, the Poet has trespassed against the order and method observed by his philosophical guide; and by that trespass broken the thread of his history of the Drama, which has added to the difficulty and obscurity of this part of his Epistle. Aristotle does not speak of the Measure, till he has brought Tragedy, through all its progressive stages, from the Dithyrambicks, down to its establishment by Aeschylus and Sophocles. If the reader would judge of the poetical beauty, as well as logical precision, of such an arrangement, let him transfer this section of the Epistle [beginning, in the original at v. 251. and ending at 274.] to the end of the 284th line; by which transposition, or I am much mistaken, he will not only disembarrass this historical part of it, relative to the Grascian stage, but will pass by a much easier, and more elegant, transition, to the Poet's application of the narrative to the Roman Drama,

The English reader, inclined to make the experiment, must take the lines of the translation from v. 268. to v. 403, both inclusive, and insert them after v. 418.

In shameful silence loft the pow'r to wound.

It is further to be observed that this detail on the IAMBICK is not, with strict propriety, annext to a critical history of the SATYR, in which, as Aristotle insinuates insinuates, was used the Capering Tetrameter, and, as the Grammarians observe, Trisyllabicks.



394.—PISOS! BE GRAECIAN MODELS, &c.]

Pope has imitated and illustrated this passage.

Be Homer's works your study and delight, Read them by day, and meditate by night; Thence form your judgment, thence your maxims bring, And trace the Muses upwards to their spring. Still with itself compar'd, his text peruse! And let your comment be the Mantuan Muse!

Essay on Criticism.



404.—A KIND OF TRAGICK ODE, UNKNOWN BEFORE, THESPIS, 'TIS SAID, INVENTED FIRST. IGNOTUM Tragicae GENUS INVENISSE Camaenae Dicitur, &c.

It is surprising that Dacier, who, in a controversial note, in refutation of Heinsius, has so properly remarked Horace's adherence to Aristotle, should not have observed that his history of the Drama opens and proceeds nearly in the same order. Aristotle indeed does not name Thespis, but we cannot but include his improvements among the changes, to which the Critick refers, before Tragedy acquired a permanent form under AEschylus. Thespis seems not only to have embodied the CHORUS, but to have provided a theatrical apparatus for an itinerant exhibition; to have furnished disguises for his performers, and to have broken the continuity of the CHORUS by an Interlocutor; to whom AEschylus adding another personage, thereby first created Dramatick Dialogue; while at the same time by a further diminution of the CHORUS, by improving the dresses of the actors, and drawing them from their travelling waggon to a fixt stage, he created a regular theatre.

It appears then that neither Horace, nor Aristotle, ascribe the origin of Tragedy to Thespis. the Poet first mentions the rude beginning of Tragedy, (carmen tragicum) the Goat-song; he then speaks of the Satyrick Chorus, soon after interwoven with it; and then proceeds to the improvements of these Bacchic Festivities, by Thespis, and AEschylus; though their perfection and final establishment is ascribed by Aristotle to Sophocles. Dacier very properly renders this passage, On dit que Thespis fut le premier jui inventa une especi de tragedie auparavant inconnue aux Grecs. Thespis is said to be the first inventor of a species of Tragedy, before unknown to the Greeks.

Boileau seems to have considered this part of the Epistle in the same light, that I have endeavoured to place it.

La Tragedie informe & grossiere au naissant n'etoit qu'un simple Choeur, ou chacun en danfant, et du Dieu des Raisins entonnant les louanges, s'essorcoit d'attirer de fertiles vendanges. la le vin et la joie eveillant les esprits, du plus habile chantre un Bouc etoit le prix. Thespis sut le premier, qui barbouille de lie, promena par les bourgs cette heureuse folie; et d'acteurs mal ornes chargeant un tombereau, amusa les passans d'un spectacle nouveau. aeschyle dans le Choeur jetta les personages; d'un masque plus honnete habilla les visages: sur les ais d'un Theatre en public exhausse, fit paroitre l'acteur d'un brodequin chausse.

L'art poetique, chant troisieme.



417.—the sland'rous Chorus drown'd In shameful silence, lost the pow'r to wound.

Chorusque turpiter obticuit, sublato jure nocendi.

"Evidently because, though the _jus nocendi_ was taken away, yet that was no good reason why the Chorus should entirely cease. M. Dacier mistakes the matter. _Le choeur se tut ignominuesement, parce-que la hi reprimasa licence, et que ce sut, a proprement parler, la hi qui le bannit; ce qu' Horace regarde comme une espece de sietrissure. Properly speaking,_ the law only abolished the abuse of the chorus. The ignominy lay in dropping the entire use of it, on account of this restraint. Horace was of opinion, that the chorus ought to have been retained, though the state had abridged it of the licence, it so much delighted in, of an illimited, and intemperate satire, _Sublatus chorus fuit,_ says Scaliger, _cujus illae videntur esse praecipuae partet, ut potissimum ques liberet, laedertnt."

Notes on the Art of Poetry._ If Dacier be mistaken in this instance, his mistake is common to all the commentators; not one of whom, the learned and ingenious author of the above he excepted, has been able to extract from these words any marks of Horace's predilection in favour of a Chorus, or censure of "its culpable omission" in Comedy. De Nores expresses the general sense of the Criticks on this passage.

[Turpiter.] Quia lex, declarata Veteris Conaetdiae scriptorum improbitate, a maledicendi licentia deterruit.—Sicuti enim antea summa cum laude Vetus Comediae, accepta est, ita postea summa est cum turpitudine vetantibus etiam legibus repudiata, quia probis hominibus, quia sapientibus, quia inte*s maledixerit. Quare Comaediae postea conscriptae ad hujusce Veteris differentiam sublato choro, novae appellatae sunt.

What Horace himself says on a similar occasion, of the suppression of the Fescennine verses, in the Epistle to Augustus, is perhaps the best comment on this passage.

—quin etiam lex Paenaque lata, malo quae nollet carmine quenquam— describi: vertere modum formindine fustis ad bene dicendum delectandumque redacti.



421.—-Daring their Graecian masters to forsake, And for their themes domestick glories take.

Nec minimum meruere decus, vestigia Graeca Ausi deserere, & celebrare domestica facta.

The author of the English Commentary has a note on this passage, replete with fine taste, and sound criticism.

"This judgment of the poet, recommending domestic subjects, as fittest for the stage, may be inforced from many obvious reasons. As, 1. that it renders the drama infinitely more affecting: and this on many accounts, 1. As a subject, taken from our own annals, must of course carry with it an air of greater probability, at least to the generality of the people, than one borrowed from those of any other nation. 2. As we all find a personal interest in the subject. 3. As it of course affords the best and easiest opportunities of catching our minds, by frequent references to our manners, prejudices, and customs. And of how great importance this is, may be learned from hence, that, even in that exhibition of foreign characters, dramatic writers have found themselves obliged to sacrifice sacrifice truth and probability to the humour of the people, and to dress up their personages, contrary to their own better judgment, in some degree according to the mode and manners of their respective countries [Footnote: "L'etude egale des poetes de differens tems a plaire a leurs spectateurs, a encore inssue dans la maniere de peindre les caracteres. Ceux qui paroissent sur la scene Angloise, Espagnols, Francoise, sont plus Anglois, Espagnols, ou Francois que Grecs ou Romains, en un mot que ce qu'ils doivent etre. II ne faut qu'en peu de discernement pour s'appercevoir que nos Cesars et nos Achilles, en gardant meme un partie de leur charactere primitif, prennent droit de naturalite dans le pais ou ils sont transplantez, semblables a ces portraits, qui sortent de la main d'un peintre Flamand, Italien, ou Francois, et qui portent l'empreinte du pais. On veut plaire a sa nation, et rien ne plait tant que le resemblance de manieres et de enie." P. Brumoy, vol. i. p. 200.] And, 4. as the writer himself, from an intimate acquaintance with the character and genius of his own nation, will be more likely to draw the manners with life and spirit.