odes like Pindar and Horace, but many of them have Occasionally attempted this species of composition. The chief of these in English are Dryden, Pope, Addison, Gray, and Akenside.

Obs. 1. The first three are distinguished by their odes to St. Cecilia, in praise of the powers of music; the subjects of the last two are miscellaneous. As the first three have attempted successively to adorn the same theme, it affords a good opportunity of comparing their merits.

2. Alexander's Feast, by Dryden, has gained universal fame, and it seems to deserve all the reputation it has attained. It is difficult to decide whether the sentiments or the composition merit the most praise. The sentiments are admirably suited to the personages whom they describe, and the composition is fitted with equal propriety to the sentiments. The sentiments are artfully contrasted, a circumstance which, added to their natural excellence, displays them in the most captivating light.

3. A train of grand and sublime thoughts is succeeded by a series of gay and pleasant ones; a set of outrageous and furious couceptions, is contrasted with a group of gentle and tender ones. The poet shakes the spheres with Jupiter, revels with Bacchus, raves and destroys with the furies, and drops a tear with his hero over the misfortunes of Darius.

4. Pope has attempted, in his ode in honor of St. Cecilia, the inventress of the organ, to introduce different passions, and to contrast both the sentiments and the versification, as had been done by Dryden. He has very happily selected for his subject the fable of Orpheus and Eurydice, a story naturally tender and pathetic, of which the reverse of fortune is great, and the different parts are strongly opposed.

5. Addison was fond of the fame of a poet, though he enjoyed not the best powers for acquireing it. He wished, it is said, to rival Pope as a translator of Homer; he even wished to rival him ia lyric merit. He ventured to appear on the same ground which Pope and Dryden had occupied with so much lustre; and his ode to St. Cecilia exhibited him in a contrast which could not fail to hurt his reputation; for of all the poetry which Addison has written, he has scarcely composed any thing so indifferent as this ode.

6. The odes of Gray are entitled to high praise, though they are unequal in their merit, which is also the fate of different stanzas of the same ode. His sentiments are conceived with great vigour and propriety, and his versification is the post laboured, perhaps in the English language. He frequently attempts the Pindaric magnificence and sublimity, and he never fails to appropriate some of its darkness and obscurity.

7. Akenside aims at ease, ingenuity, and elegance, and he is not unsuccessful. His imagination is delicate and picturesque, his versification is smooth and melodious. He is not defective in sentiment, and in ornament he has a claim to high applause.

CHAPTER V.

DIDACTIC POETRY.

588. DIDACTIC poetry discusses some branch of useful science, some beneficial art, or some system of prudential or moral conduct, by which the reader may improve his knowledge, his wisdom, or his vir tue; and it recommends the discussion by all the merits of imagination, and all the charms of poetical composition.

Illus. 1. In executing the useful part of the task, it collects all the best theories and most approved practices, and arranges them, with the reasons of them, in that distinct and lucid order in which they are most likely to make the deepest impression. It sometimes adds the most sagacious reflections, pleasant speculations, or important discoveries, which have resulted from the research or the ingenuity of the author. It condescends also to recapitulate and expose vulgar or irrational principles and practices; which have derived their origin from a necessity, perhaps, that no longer exists, or which remain fostered and cherished by prejudice or by igno

rance.

2. In executing the ornamental parts, it illustrates every theory and practice with simplicity and vivacity; but that the familiarity or the lowliness of the topics of which it must sometimes treat, may not offend the nicest reader, it is extremely solicitous to add dignity to the illustration by the use of figurative and descriptive phraseology. It seldom calls common objects by their proper names. It employs elevated and metaphorical appellations, or it describes them by their causes or their effects. It bestows much attention to enliven its descriptions and scenes, by throwing into them all the animation with which they are any way connected. Many of the inanimate objects are personified; all the irrational animals are endued with character, sentiment, and design; the human actors are rendered respectable by the activity and virtue of their lives, the sagacity of their judgments, the utility of their occupations; or they are held up as objects of aversion, that the reader may learn, from their folly, absurdity, or criminality, to avoid that conduct which bas rendered them ridiculous, odious, or unhappy.

3. But the great ornaments of didactic poetry are beautiful or interesting episodes. To vary and adorn his subject, the author is allowed frequently to shift the scene, and to introduce any moral, philosophical, or sentimental relation or discussion with which it is connected. No other species of poetry admits so much latitude in this article. If the episodes are properly varied in length, and if they are not

very violently forced into his service, the author will not incur much reprehension, though he often depart from his principal subject, and though the sum of the episodes, taken together, even exceed in extent the didactic part of the poern.

4. Through the whole of his poem, the author may display much knowledge of the particular subject he treats, and of many other useful and ornamental sciences and arts; much acquaintance with nature, society, manners, and the human heart. He may be grave, gay, sublime, easy, austere, pathetic, as shall best suit his genius and his matter. The versification must be always correct and melodious; and it may be elevated occasionally to a high degree of energy and dignity. It is also susceptible of every ornament, addressed to the imagination or the passions, of which the different topics or episodes admit. Metaphors, comparisons, personifications, apostrophes, may all be incidentally introduced; and if they are pertinently applied, their appearance will add grace and interest to the composition.

Scholia. 1. When this species of poetry promises so much improvement and entertainment to the reader, and when the author possesses so many favourable opportunities of displaying his knowledge, his genius, and his taste, we will not be surprised that it has been attempted by poets of high fame in different ages. Aratus discussed in Greek the phenomena of the heavens, and Lucretius in Latin the philosophy of Epicurus. Virgil has treated the whole theory and practice of agriculture, and Armstrong the art of preserving health. The writers on morals and manners are mostly satirical; yet Pope has avoided satirism in his elegant system of morals in the Essay on Man. The capital satirists, ancient and modern, are Horace, Juvenal, Pope, and Young.

2. Armstrong possessed a large portion of the genius of Virgil, and, like him, has adorned the history of health, a subject naturally unpromising, with all the embellishment of fine versification and elegant fancy. He elevates and beautifies every precept, and he is fortunats in episodes. The true spirit of poetry is conspicuous in all he writes, and his compositions cannot be perused without instruction and pleasure. He appears to be one of the best didactic poets in the English language, and not inferior to any ancient author in the same line, except Virgil.

3. The Essay on Man admitted fewer embellishments and episodes than the poems which we have mentioned. The author's design was more serious than that of any other writer of his class. Instruction was his main object, and no ornaments are introduced but what are manifestly subservient to this end. He employs metaphors frequently, and sometimes comparisons, but they are never mere addresses to the fancy of the reader, they always contribute to illustrate and impress the matter.

4. This famous essay is literally a system of morals, founded on the celebrated doctrine first broached by Plato, and afterwards explained and recommended by Leibnitz and Lord Shaftsbury, that

no evil is admitted into the system of nature but what is inseparable from its existence; and that all possible provision is made for the happiness of every creature it contains. The author acknowledges that the gravity of his subject was more adapted to a discussion in prose, than a treatise in verse, but that he preferred the latter, because it was more adapted to his genius, and was more likely to engage the attention and recollection of the reader.

5. The discussion is ingenious and instructive. We, however, desiderate that distinct and lucid arrangement which we discern in the productions of the other two eminent moderns. Neither has the versification all the merits which shine in his other works; it is frequently abrupt, if not obscure, and possesses not the melody and flow of his other poetry. The abstract nature of the subject, perhaps, and his sincere desire to instruct, rather than to please, may furnish an apology.

589. SATIRISTs are a species of negative didactic poets, who teach and amuse by censuring what is wrong, and exposing what is foolish. They seldom attempt to inculcate positively what is good, or to recommend what is decent; they leave this task to moralists and public instructors. They would be most reputable and useful writers, were they successful in what they undertake, to banish iniquity and folly from society. They are divided into two classes.

Illus. 1. One class attacks immorality and impropriety with a stern look and severe reprehension. It paints them in all their deformity as objects of aversion, and it fails not to inflict upon them that censure which they deserve. It allows few of those excuses and alleviations which are usually urged for the errors of men. It delineates them as bad as they really are, and is sometimes inclined rather to exaggerate than to apologise. It wishes to deter mankind from vicious or foolish actions or sentiments, by the odium, the misery, the disapprobation which attend them.

2. The other class assaults vice and folly with ridicule. It exposes the whims, the oddities, the absurdities, and the crimes of men, in such a manner as to make them ashamed. But if ridicule does not succeed, it relinquishes them as incorrigible. An author of this class is never angry, he is never even serious. When a crime should rouse the resentment of the former class, and draw from them severe chastisement, they remain unmoved, and smile at the culprit as a fool. Horace altogether, and Pope in some measure, are satirists of the latter class; Juvenal and Young belong to the for

mer.

2. Horace was an epicurean in philosophy, and, according to the

principles of that indolent sect, seems to have adopted a rule of conduct, that nothing should ruffle his temper. He appears to have considered the vices of his countrymen as not deserving his resentment; or to have been of opinion that reprehension was not the way to reform them. He accordingly never discomposes himself when he mentions them.

4. Juvenal is a grave, severe satirist, and a stern censor of the errors and follies of mankind. He never condescends to smile, or to insinuate improprieties without reprehending them. He seems to consider ceremony and politeness as marks of insincerity, and as trifling with the evil, instead of attempting a radical cure. He seldom takes notice of folly, but, when he does, he touches her airy and volatile form with a firm and rough hand. He thinks her deserving of more serious treatment than to laugh at her, because she may be either the companion or the parent of iniquity. He displays, at the same time, much good sense, much knowledge of the world, and a great share of the faculty of imagination.

5. Fope attempts to unite the good humour of Horace with the gravity of Juvenal, but he leans more to the manner of the latter, than that of the former. He was naturally of a keen temper, and particularly irritable by reflections which glanced either at his private character or his fame, Many of his satirical writings were prompted by this spirit and we regret that a man of his genius should have wasted his time, and disturbed his repose, by retaliating on critics animated by a degree of ignorance or folly which rendered them contemptible.

6. Young has much merit as a satirist. He is not so severe as Juvenal, though he is always in earnest, and never attempts to excite a laugh. He appears as a sincere moralist, zealous to correct the vices and follies of mankind, by holding up pictures to excite their reflection on the impropriety of their errors. His Love of Fame displays much knowledge of human nature, and no small merit in point of versification. He is a satirist whom we love and respect, because we conceive him actuated by good nature, and backward to reprehend, were it possible to reform by more gentle means. He possesses neither the sprightliness of Horace, nor the vehemence of Juvenal, but he is more dignified than the former, and more amiable than the latter. He is not so facetious and pleasant as Horace, but neither is he so sour and forbidding as Juvenal. Horace seems to have consulted his own amusement, and Juvenal the gratification of his spleen, as much as the entertainment or emolument of their readers. Young writes to improve mankind, and, with the regard and affection of a parent, chastises only that he may amend. Though we wish he had more mirth, yet we respect him as an useful author, and a genuine friend of virtue.