his cafe or humour. When he wanted to fleep, he nodded in company, ahd once flumbered at hit own table, while the Prince of Wales was talking of poetry. In familiar or convivial conversation he was not distinguished by vivacity. In his eating, he was both dainty and voracious; and when he had eaten too much, if a dram had been offered to him, he pretended to be angry, but did not forbear to drink it. It does not appear that he was addicted to wine. His impatience and irritability often led him into little quarrels, that would make him leave the houses of his friends abruptly. At Lord Oxford's he frequently met Lady Mary Wortley Montague, who knowing his peevishinefs, could by no entreaties be restrained from contradicting him, till their difputes were sharpened to fuch afperity, that one or other quitted the house. At home he was chiefly distinguished for his frugality. It is faid that when he had two guests in his house, he would only fet a fingle pint of wine on the table. He fometimes gave a fplendid entertainment; and on thofe occafions fhowed tafte, and magnificence. Of his fortune, which was very honourably obtained, he was proud. The great topic of his ridicule is poverty. He was accused of loving money; but his love was eagerness to gain, not folicitude to keep it. He affifted Dodfley with a hundred pounds, that he might open a fhop, and contributed twenty pounds a-year to the subscription for Savage; and bestowed confiderable fums on charity. He was a faithful and conftant friend; and notwithstanding the little defects of his constitutional temper, was beloved by them during his life, and remembered with the most tender affection after his death. His refentment was too easily excited, and his revenge carried to too great a length. The provocation he received by no means justified, in many cafes, the fevere satire of the Dunciad. His malignity to Philips, whom he had at first made ridiculous, and then hated for being angry, continued too long. Of his vain defire to make Bentley contemptible, no good reason can be given. He was sometimes wanton in his attacks, before Chandos, Lady Mary Wortley Montague, and Hill, niean in his retreat. Though, on the whole, a man of integrity, he frequently used artifices that bordèred on difengenuity. Thofe, however, seem to have refulted more from the idea of fuperiority, than of impofing upon others. Even that gratification was a weakness in the character of Pope. Artifice and cunning require very little ability. A man of fuch exalted fuperiority, and fo little moderation, would naturally have all his delinquencies observed; those who could not deny that he was excellent, would rejoice to find that he was not perfect.

Of his intellectual character, the constituent and fundamental principle was good sense, a prompt and intuitive perception of confonance and propriety. He had likewife genius; a mind active, ambitious, and adventurous, always inveftigating, always afpiring. He was endowed with a fertile invention, and brilliant wit. To affift these powers, he had great strength and exactness of memory, which readily supplied the understanding with abundance of materials. Thofe gifts he improved by indefatigable industry, and acquired a great compafs of knowledge, completely digefted.

Thus endowed with the means of acquifition, he superadded the most effectual and agreeable modes of communication. His language is clear, forcible and elegant, enriched with figures, that at once illuftrate, adorn, and imprefs. He confidered poetry as the bufinefs of his life, and however he might feem to lament his occupation, he followed it with conftancy; to make verfes was his first labour, and to mend them was his laft. He used always the fame fabric of verse. Of this uniformity the certain confequence was readiness and dexterity. By perpetual practice, language had in his mind a fyftematical arrangement; having always the fame ufe for words, he had words fo felected and combined as to be ready at his call.

On the general character and effect of his poems, it is the less necessary to enlarge, as little remains to be added to the diftinct examination of his excellent biographer, Dr. Johnson, and the masterly criticism of Dr. Warton.

In his Paftorals, Dr. Warton obferves, there is not to be found a single inftance of a rural image that is new. The ideas of Theocritus, Virgil, and Spenser, are indeed exhibited in language equally mellifluous and pure, but the defcriptions and fentiments are trite, and common. A mixture of British and Grecian ideas may justly be deemed a blemish. An Englishman fpeaks of "celeftial Venus, and Idalia's Groves, of Diana and Cynthius." They exhibit, however, a feries of versification, which had in English poetry no precedent, nor has fince had an imitation.

The defign of Windfor Foreft is evidently derived from Denham's "Cooper's Hill," with fome at

tention to Waller's poem on "The Park ;" but Pope cannot be denied to excel his mafters in variety, and elegance, and the art of interchanging description, narrative, and morality.

Of the Temple of Fame, every part is fplendid; there is great luxuriance of ornaments. The original vifion of Chaucer is much improved; the imagery is properly selected, and learnedly displayed ; yet, with all this comprehenfion of excellence, it never obtained much notice, and is feldom quoted or mentioned, with either praise or blame.

That the Meffiab excells the "Pollio" of Virgil, is no great praife, if it is confidered from what fublime original the improvements are derived. Sumetimes indeed the fimple grandeur of Jaiab is diminished by florid epithets, and injudicious prettineffes.

The Elegg on an Unfortunate Lady, as it came from the heart, is very tender and pathetic; nor has Pope produced any poem in which the sense predominates more over the diction.

Of the Ode for St. Cecilia's Day, it is fufficient praise, that it is only inferior to the inimitable "Alexander's Feaft" of Dryden. The general effect is very pleasing, and often striking.

Of the Eay on Criticism, Dr. Johnson observes, that if he had written nothing clfe, it would have placed him among the first critics and the first poets, as it exhibits every mode of excellence that can embellish or dignify didactic composition, selection of matter, novelty of arrangement, justness of precept, fplendour of illustration, and propriety of digression.

The Rape of the Lock is univerfally allowed to be the most attractive of all ludicrous compositions. The means employed are, vigorous thought, brilliant fancy, poignant wit, forcible satire, and refined humour, most agreeably interwoven and diversified. The machinery is an ingenious expansion of that in Shakspeare's " Tempest," and the Roficrucian dialogue of the Comte de Gabalis. The epistle of Eloifa to Abelard is replete with poetical fire, paffionate language, picturefque ima gery, and pathetic exclamation, which strike the imagination with a captivating horror.

"Clouds interpose, waves roar, and winds arife."

It has certainly a charm hardly to be equalled; for who can read it without experiencing the alternate impulfe of defire, pity, or rage; and lastly, the freezing languor of irrecoverable despair. "This epiftle," fays Dr. Warton, " is one of the most highly finished, and certainly the most interesting of the pieces of Pope; and, together with the Elegy on an Unfortunate Lady, is the only inftance of the pathetic he has given us.”

The tranflation of Homer is a performance which no age or nation can pretend to equal. Such a verfion, the most perfe& knowledge of the Greek and English languages could not have produced. It is not the work of a scholar or verfifier merely; it is the performance of a poet. The diction and verfification must vindicate to themselves a very confiderable share of the merit of this masterly work. "Pope fearched the pages of Dryden," says Dr. Johnson," for happy combinations of poetic diction; but it will not be denied that he added much to what he found. He cultivated the language with so much diligence and art, that he has left in his Homer a treasure of poetical elegances to pofterity. His verfion may be said to have tuned the English tongue; for fince its appearance, no writer, however deficient in other powers, has wanted melody. Such a series of lines, so elaborately corrected, and so sweetly modulated, took poffeffion of the public ear; the vulgar was ena moured of the poem, and the learned wondered at the translation.”

It has been objected by fome, that it is not Homerical; that it exhibits no refemblance of the ori ginal and characteristic manner of the Father of Poetry, as it wants his awful fimplicity, his artless grandeur, his unaffected majesty. This cannot be totally denied. Homer doubtlefs owes to his tranflator many Ovidian graces, not strictly suitable to his character; but to have added can be no great crime, if nothing be taken away. Elegance is furely to be desired, if it be not gained at the expence of dignity. Pope wrote for his own age and his own nation; he knew that it was neceffary to colour the images, and paint the sentiments of his author; he therefore made him graceful, but loft some of his fublimity.

As a work of wit and ingenious fatire, the Dunciad has few equals. The hint is confeffedly taken from Dryden's "Mac Flecknoe;" but the plan is fo enlarged and diversified, as justly to claim the praise of an original, and affords, perhaps, the best specimen that has yet appeared of perfonal fatire, ludicrously pompous. Without approving of the petulance and malignity of the defign, the gigour of intellect, and the fertility of fancy which it difplays, are equally admirable.

"The beauties of this poem," fays Dr. Johnfon," are well known; its chief fault is the grofe nefs of its images. But even this fault, offenfive as it is, may be forgiven for the excellence of other paffages; fuch as the formation and diffolution of Moore, the account of the Traveller, the misfortune of the Florist, and the crowded thoughts and fately numbers which dignify the concluding paragraph." The Effay on Man, is a didactic poem written on metaphyfical ideas, which he did not perfectly comprehend. His intentions were evidently good, to fhow men that the existence of imperfection and evil is not inconfiftent with the wisdom and goodnefs of God. Many of the facts are true, many of the obfervations are just, but do not tend to establish the truth of the proposed system. The adaptation of human fenfes, paffions, and reafon, to their ends, the co-operation of the principles of felf-love and benevolence, in producing happiness, the uncertainty of phyfical good, that man's fupreme felicity confifts in moral good, that we are very weak in comparison to our Creator, are all pofitions which are undoubtedly true, but do not prove that partial evil is univerfal good; that whatever is, is right. Pope, like Addison, had confidered man chiefly in active life. When he exhibits him in action, his exhibition is natural, beautiful, and juft; but when he analyfes his principles of thought, and of action, he is not always fo fuccefsful. Voltaire ridiculed Pope's favourite position in his Candide. The confequences which Candide's application of the prinIciple to various cafes produces, are certainly fuch as Pope never intended, yet it must be acknowledged he did not fufficiently guard against his interpretation.

"This effay," fays Dr. Johnson," is certainly not the happieft of Pope's performances. It affords an egregious inftance of the predominance of genius, the dazzling fplendour of imagery, and the seductive powers of eloquence. Never were penury of knowledge, and vulgarity of fentiment fo happily difguifed, or recommended by such a blaze of `embellishments, or fuch fweetness of melody. The vigorous contraction of fome thoughts, the luxuriant amplification of others, the incidental illustrations, and fometimes the dignity, fometimes the foftness of the verfes, enchain philofophy, fufpend criticism, and oppress judgment, by overpowering pleasure.”

"This is true of many paragraphs; yet if I had undertaken to exemplify Pope's felicity of compofition before a rigid critic, I should not select the Essay on Man: for it contains more lines unfuccessfully laboured, more harshness of diction, more thoughts imperfectly expressed, more levity without elegance, and more heaviness without ftrength, than will eafily be found in all his other works." The Charaters of Men and Women, are the product of diligent fpeculation upon life and manners, and show a thorough knowledge of the human nind, engaged in action, and modified by the manners of the times.

"I recommend," fays Dr. Johnson, a comparison of his Characters of Women, with Boileau's fatire; it will then be feen with how much more perfpicacity female nature is inveftigated, and female excellence felected. The Characters of Men, however, are written with more, if not with deeper thought, and exhibit many paffages exquifitely beautiful. The Gem, and the Flower, will not cafily be equalled. In the women's part are fome defects; the character of Atofa, is not fo neatly finished as that of Clodio; and fome of the female characters may be found, perhaps, more frequently among men."

Of his Epifle to Lord Bathurst, the most valuable passage is, perhaps, the eulogy on Good Senfe; and of the Epifle to Lord Burlington, the end of Villiers, Duke of Buckingham. Of the Epifle to Arbuthnot, no part has more elegance, fpirit, or dignity, than the vindication of his own character. The me.net paffage is the fatire upon Sporus. The allusion to his mother is exquifitely beautiful and interefting. His translations from Ovid are rendered with faithfulness and elegance. The epiftle from Sappho to Phaon breathe such paffionate and pathetic fentiments as are worthy of the exquifite fenfibility of the amorous Sappho; and the verfification is in point of melody next to that of the Paftorals.

On his Epitaphs, the minute criticism of Dr. Johnson, printed in the "Vifitor," is acute, and well enforced; but his examination is too rigorous, and the general opinion is much more favourable. His Imitations of Horace, difplay a great portion of wit, as well as argument. He has the humour, and almost the cafe of Horace, with more wit, and falls little fhort of the feverity of Juvenal, In his Letters he is feen as connected with the other contemporary wits, and fuffers no difgrace in the comparison. Thofe of Arbuthnot are written with eafe and a beautiful fimplicity. Swift's

alío are unaffected. Several of Bolingbroke's and Atterbury's are masterly. There is fomething more Atudied and artificial in Pope's productions than the reft. His letters to ladies are full of affectation. "Pope may be faid," fays Dr. Johnson, " to write always with his reputation in his head; Swift perhaps like a man who remembered that he was writing to Pope; but Arbuthnot, like one who lets thoughts drop from his pen, as they rife into his mind.”

The compositions of Pope are perhaps a greater acceffion to English literature, than those of any other poet of our nation, except Spenfer, Shakspeare, and Milton. Of thofe poets who rank in the highest class after them, Dryden is generally allowed to be the first; but his claim to that dif tinction is at least rendered doubtful by the pretenfions of Pope, who learned his poetry from Dryden, and whose character perhaps may receive fome illustration, if he be compared with his master. To regulate the scale, by which the comparative merit of poetical pretenfions is to be estimated, is one of the most difficult undertakings of criticifm. Something of this kind, however, is attempted by Dr. Johnson in his parallel between Dryden and Pope, of which it is fcarcely hyperbolical to af· firm, that it is every way worthy of its subject, and such as perhaps the pen of Dr. Johnson only could have written.

Integrity of understanding, and nicety of discernment, were not allotted in a lefs proportion to Dryden than to Pope. The rectitude of Dryden's mind was fufficiently fhown by the difmission of his poetical prejudices, and the rejection of unnatural thoughts, and rugged numbers. But Dryden never defired to apply all the judgment that he had. He wrote, and profeffed to write, merely for the people; and when he pleafed others, he contented himfelf. Pope was not content to fatisfy; he defired to excel; and therefore always endeavoured to do his best. He did not court the candour, but dared the judgment of his reader; and expecting no indulgence from others, he showed none to himself. For this reason, he kept his pieces very long in his hands, while he confidered, and reconfidered them. It will feldom be found that he altered, without adding clearness, elegance and vigour. Pope had perhaps the judgment of Dryden, but Dryden certainly wanted the diligence of Pope.

"In acquired knowledge, the fuperiority must be allowed to Dryden, whofe education was more fcholaftic. His mind has a larger range, and he collects his images and illustrations from a more extenfive circumference of fcience. Dryden knew more of man in his general nature, and Pope in his local manners. The notions of Dryden were formed by a comprehenfive fpeculation, and thofe of Pope by minute attention. There is more dignity in the knowledge of Dryden, and more certainty in that of Pope.

"Poetry was not the fole praise of either, for both excelled likewife in profe; but Pope did not borrow his profe from his predeceffors. The style of Dryden is capricious and varied; that of Pope is cautious and uniform. Dryden obferves the motions of his own mind; Pope constrains his mind to his own rules of compofition. Dryden is fometimes vehement and rapid; Pope is always smooth, uniform, and gentle. Dryden's page is a natural field, rifing into inequalities, and diversified by the varied exuberance of abundant vegetation; Pope's is a velvet lawn, fhaven by the scythe, and levelled by the roller.

"Of genius, that power which constitutes a poet, that quality without which judgment is cold, and knowledge is inert; that energy which collects, combines, amplifies, and animates, the fuperiority muk, with some hesitation, be allowed to Dryden. It is not to be inferred, that of this poetical vigour Pope had only a little, because Dryden had more, for every other writer fince Milton must give place to Pope; and even of Dryden it must be said, that if he has brighter para-. graphs, he has not better poems. Dryden's performances were always hafty, either excited by fome external occafion, or extorted by fome domeftic neceffity; he compofed without confideration, and published without correction. What his mind could fupply at call, or gather in one excurfion, was all that he fought, and all that he gave. The dilatory caution of Pope enabled him to condense his fentiments, to multiply his images, and to accumulate all that study might produce, or chance might fupply. If the flights of Dryden therefore are higher, Pope continues longer on the wing. If of Dryden's fire the blaze is brighter, of Pope's the heat is more regular and conftant. Dryden often furpaffes expectation, and Fope never falls below it; Dryden is read with frequent aftonishent, and Pope with perpetual delight."

The subject of this truly excellent parallel has been controverted by Mr. Weflon and Mife Seward, in the "Gentleman's Magazine" for 1790. Both parties have shown much critical ingenuity in maintaining the pretenfions of their favourite poet. To give any adequate idea of the controversy, would much exceed the limits of this preface. Mr. Weston, with justice, cenfures the poetry of Pope, as too exquifitely polished, too uniformly musical, and as glutting the ear with unvaried sweetness. Judging perhaps by principles, rather than perception, he seems to think studied difcords, varied pauses, triplets, expletives, and Alexandrines, effential to rhyme, because they have been used by Dryden. But the poetry of Pope, though perhaps less impregnated with enthusiasm, lefs enriched with claffical knowledge, lefs illumined by vivid imagination, and less diversified by variety of cadence, is certainly more elaborately correct, more regularly harmonious, more delicately polished, and more fyftematically dignified, than that of Dryden.

He has even ventured to affert, that Pope was not a poet, but only an elegant verfifier. When he affirms that the author of the Rape of the Lock, of the Dunciad, of Eloifa to Abelard, and of the English Iliad, was not a poet, he must mean something by the term different from the general acceptation.

"If Pope be not a poet," fays Dr. Johnfon, "where is poetry to be found? To circumfcribe poetry by a definition, will only fhow the narrowness of the definer, though a definition which fhall exclude Pope, will not easily be made. Let us look round upon the present time, and back upon the past; let us inquire to whom the voice of mankind has decreed the wreath of poetry; let their productions be examined, and their claims stated, and the pretensions of Pope will no more be difputed. Had he given the world only his version, the name of poet must have been allowed him; if the writer of the Iliad were to class his fucceffors, he would assign a very high place to his tranflator, without requiring any other evidence of genius."

A parallel, upon a more extensive scale, is given by Dr. Warton, in which the poetical qualifica. tions of Pope are as candidly examined, as they are judiciously discriminated.

"Of Pope's works, the largest portion is of the didactic, moral, and fatyric kind; and consequently not of the most poetic fpecies of poetry: whence it is manifeft, that good sense and judgment were his characteristical excellencies, rather than fancy and invention; not that the author of the Rape of 1 Lock and Eloifa can be thought to want imagination, but because his imagination was not his predominant talent; because he indulged it not, and because he gave not so many proofs of this ta. lent as of the other. This turn of mind led him to admire French models; he studied Boileau attentively, formed himself upon him, as Milton formed himself upon the Grecian and Italian fons of Fancy. He gradually became one of the most correct, even, and exact poets that ever wrote, poJifhing his pieces with a care and affiduity that no business or avocation ever interrupted; so that if he does not frequently ravish and transport his reader, yet he does not disgust him with unexpected inequalities and abfurd improprieties. Whatever poetical enthusiasm he actually possessed, he withheld and ftifled. The perufal of him affects not our minds with such strong emotions as we feel from Homer and Milton; fo that no man of a true poetical spirit is master of himself while he reads them. Hence, he is a writer fit for universal perufal, adapted to all ages and stations, for the old and for the young, the man of business and the scholar. He who would think " Palamon and Arcite," "The Tempeft," or " Comus," childish and romantic, might relish Pope. Surely it is no narrow and niggardly encomium to say, that he is the great poet of reafon, the first of ethical authors in verse.

Where then shall we, with juftice, be authorised to place our admired Pope? Not affuredly in the fame rank with Spenfer, Shakspeare, and Milton; however justly we may applaud the Eloifa and Rape of the Lock 3 but, confidering the correctness, elegance, and utility of his works, the weight of fentiment, and the knowledge of man they contain, we may venture to affign him a place next to Milton, and just above Dryden. Yet, to bring our minds steadily to make this decifion, we must forget for a moment the divine " Music Ode" of Dryden, and may perhaps then be compelled to confefs, that though Dryden be the greater genius, yet Pope is the better artist.

"The preference here given to Pope above other Modern English Poets, it must be remember. ed, is founded on the excellencies of his works in general, and taken all together; for there are parts and paffages in other modern authors, in Young and in Thomfon for inftance, equal to any of Pope; and he has written nothing in a ftrain fo truly fublime as the " Bard of Gray."

1