"In grave Quintilian's copious work, we find The jufteft rules, and cleareft method join'd."

Whoever studies and practifes Compofition, cannot pay too much attention to the Inftitutes of Quintilian, whofe rules will lead to perfection in this part of literature. This is amongst the highest praises a critic can deferve. And this is given to him, in these two very lines.

Nevertheless, the effayift remarks, that Quintilian deferves a more appropriate and poetical character: And indeed, confidering that our author has, in the piece before us, been indebted to him for many of the precepts which he has fo admirably illuftrated, it is to be wished that his juft encomium on the critic's merit, had been. fomewhat more amplified. But he seems to have reserved his ftrength to characterize the great Longinus; whom he addreffes with an abruptnefs, which at once furprizes and charms us.

"Thee, bold Longinus! all the Nine infpire,
"And blefs their Critic with a Poet's fire.
"An ardent Judge, who, zealous in his truft,
"With warmth gives fentence, yet is always
"just:

"Whofe own example firengthens all his laws;
"And is himself that great Sublime he draws."

The fpirit, energy, and propriety of these lines, are equally admirable; and as the

*There feems, nevertheless, to be a grammatical inaccuracy in thefe lines, in making the copulative follow the genitive cafe of the pronoun.

effayist

effayift candidly obferves, more fuitable to the character of the perfon addreffed, than if he had coldly spoken of him in the third person.

The poet then gives a fhort, but animated hiftory, of the decline of arts and sciences under defpotic power; and obferves, that though they afterwards made fome little efforts to revive, they were again overwhelmed :

"A fecond deluge Learning thus o'er-run, "And the Monks finifh'd what the Goths "begun.'

Then he turns towards that fecond period, in which the true critic again appeared at the revival of letters in the weft.

"But fee! each Mufe, in LEO's golden days, "Starts from her trance, and trims her wither'd bays,

"Rome's antient Genius, o'er its ruins fpread, "Shakes off the duft, and rears his rev'rend "head."

With

These lines are perfectly poetical. what awful imagery the genius of Rome is represented! Nothing can be finer than this defcriptive perfonification. It is truly fublime.

Nevertheless, the excellence of this compofition did not fecure it against the malice of criticism. Mr. Dennis, and others, vented their fpleen against it; but chiefly Mr. Dennis, a furious

H

furious old critic by profeffion, who took offence at the following lines, where Mr. POPE, after having recommended a generous freedom of advice, and obferved, that they can beft bear reproof, who merit praife, adds

" "Twere well, might Critics ftill this freedom “take,

"But Appius reddens at each word you speak, "And ftares, tremendous, with a threat'ning

66

Eye,

"Like fome fierce Tyrant in old tapestry."

It is faid that Mr. Dennis took this picture to himself, and upon no other provocation wrote against the effay and its author, in the most abfurd and virulent manner: For as to the mention made of him in ver. 270, he took it as a compliment, and said it was treacherously meant, as an inducement for him to over-look this abufe upon his perfon.

But the aukward apology he made in the preface to his frantic and illiberal critique, at once difplays the judgment and temper of the man-"I can fafely affirm," fays he, "that I never "attacked any of thefe writings, unless they had "fuccefs, infinitely beyond their merit."

Here he avows the true motives of a profeffional critic; it is not merely the demerits of a piece, but the fuccefs of it, which provokes their invidious cenfurc.

Mr.

Mr. Dennis, however, at this time bore the character of an acute critic*; though he was generally condemned as an ill-natured one: And our poet himself was once not without apprehenfions from his severity; for being asked by a particular friend, whether he ever regarded what was written against him? he answered, "Never much; only the two or three first attacks particularly when Dennis first wrote against me, it gave me fome uneafinefs, but it quickly fubfided, when I came to read his Criticifm, and found him in fuch violent rage."

Nevertheless, our poct, with an amiable frankness and candour, acknowledged the juftice of fome of his animadverfions; and in a letter to the honourable J. C. Efq; he expreffes himself with admirable temper and good fenfe, where, fpeaking of Dennis, he says, "To give "him his due, he has objected to one or two lines "with reafon, and I will alter them in cafe of "another edition: I will make my enemy do me "a kindness, where he meant an injury, and fo "ferve inftead of a friend. What he obferves at

He appears, however, to have been indebted for this character to thofe (and they are the grofs body of readers), who could not diftinguish between the mechanical part of criticism, which was learnt by the ftudy of the French critics, and that more liberal part which can only be acquired by the mens divinior. And had Dennis's turn, on this foundation, been like Mr. Addifon's, towards encomium rather than cenfure, it had enabled him to have written as good a critic on Milton's Paradife Left, as that we find in the papers of the SPECTATOR.

H 2

"the

"the bottom of page 20 of his Reflections, was "objected to by yourfelf, and had been mended "but for the hafte of the prefs."

What our author fubjoins, affords an excellent leffon for authors in general to suppress their irritability, and to truft their reputations to the judgment of the difcerning few, who will not fail to do juftice between them and their critics.

"I fhall certainly," fays he, "never make "the leaft reply to him, not only because you "advife me, but because I have ever been of opi"nion, that if a book can't anfwer for itself to "the public, 'tis to no fort of purpose for its "author to do it. If I am wrong in any fen"timent of that Essay, I proteft fincerely, I "don't defire all the world fhould be deceived "(which would be of very ill confequence) "merely that I myself may be thought right "(which is of very little confequence): I would "be the first to recant for the benefit of others, "and the glory of myself; for, (as I take it) "when a man owns himself to have been in an દર error, he does but tell you in other words, "that he is wifer than he was.'

It cannot be denied, however, but this piece, upon the whole, notwithstanding fome trivial inaccuracies, may be juftly efteemed as a pattern of compofition in the didactic way. It was not only admired by every candid critic of taste and judgment at home, but its merit diffufed itfelt