mere attention to the elegancies of narration, than to the importance of instruction and though there be much beauty in their style, neither that knowledge of policy and government, nor those views of customs and manners, are, consequently, to be drawn from their compilations, which we are to expect from the perfect historian. While, if we return from past, to latter times, where is there a wider field for admiration than the histories of Hume and Robertson afford? In their works, we find all the usefulness of knowledge, united to every elegance of language. And, provided the reader of them be not bigotted to the "Tales of other times," and be just enough to allow that something better than those musty volumes contain may be found, he may perhaps be led to think that, both in design and execution, these authors of modern date excel his adored classics. It cannot be denied that the deficiencies of the ancients are supplied by the fullness of these moderns. The accounts of the manners, customs, and policy of the people, and of the arts and elegancies of life, which were omitted in the pages of Livy and Sallust, are comprehended in the productions of Hume and Robertson. And we should not hesitate to allow them the laurels due to perfect historians, did we not reluctantly remark in the former, the occasional effusions of prejudice against the most unques.. tionable and the most happy truths; and, in the other, spite of all his professed regard for impartiality, the coolness of the historian, now and then lost in the feelings of the man.

Gibbon cannot justly be put on a par with either Hume or Robertson. It is true that the subject of the" Decline and Fall" of such an empire as that of the Romans, not only admitted, but required dignity of style; though by no means such a style as his. Elated by the greatness of his August 1806.

subject, and by the idea which he probably indulged, of astonishing and overawing the world, he seems to have set out with all those flattering prospects smiling around him, which so frequently allure the ambitious. Like the ambitious man, however, he, after a little while, discovers the illusion; and is often seen

labouring to support himself in that lofty sphere to which his vanity had raised him. raised him. Consequently, instead of overawing, he is often in danger of entertaining in no trifling degree, by the force of his metaphors, and the singularity of his phrases. Still Mr Gibbon is intitled to a considerable portion of the praise which is due to every one who has“ endeavoured well,” and who has exposed himself to much labour and anxiety for the benefit of others. It is also to be remembered, that the subject of the " Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" might have lost much of its importance and interest, by being treated in a common style.In his idea of the dignity of his subject, he seems, therefore, to have been right. of his style have probably arisen. from a wish to be "invested with the purple," when the simplicity of the "Consular Rebes" no longer exacted that respect they had once claimed.

And the faults

Without attempting to make a comment on the felicity and honour which other countries, for instance France, Spain, and Italy, have derived from the various historians, philosephers, and poets, which have done so much credit to these several soils, and whose merits, genius and learning have so ably defined; it shall be attempted here to offer a few remarks only on such authors as have done honour to the British annals.

Among the modern poets, we have none so sublime as Milton. Any encomiums offered here upon a genius so distinguished, may be mere waste of words.

There are a num

ber

ber of other poets who may more properly be called Modern, such as Pope, Parnell, Congreve, Otway, and others, all of whom are eminently and universally admired to this day. But Milton, who was before them, all in the periods of time, comes before them all in the annals of literature. He excels them alike in dig. nity of subject, in sublimity of expression, in native genius, in profoundmess of thought, and in excellence of design.

Of later years, there have been many peets justly distinguished for excellence of design, for eminence of genius, and for beauty and sub. limity of expression. First of these comes Thomson; a poet who speaks at once to the heart and understand ing; who conveys instruction while he inspires delight, and who will ever be the favourite of virtue and of

taste.

Akenside, who is thought by Mrs Barbauld to excel Thomson in respect of equality, may be thought highly praised in being called equal to him. Akenside is certainly a charming poet. His verse is smooth, flowing, sweet. And when he rises into the sublime, (which, however, he too often attempts) he frequently claims admiration from every reader,

has judgment to appreciate merit, and liberality to bestow praise. But though they who accuse Thomson of imitating Milton are justly contradicted by Dr Johnson, who insists that Thomson's poetry is original, and quite peculiar to himself, it must be allowed that the same asser tion cannot hold with regard to Akenside. For, with all possible res pect of his powers, and with every relish of his beauties, it may be alledged that he is more obliged to his talents for the " imitative arts," than to the gifts of natural genius. But still, though the greater portion of admiration be due to Thomson, Akenside must be allowed to possess,

in a very superior degree, the graces of Poesy. His metaphors are very beautiful; his arguments well con trived, and withal well supported; and his divisions just, and clearly shown.

The Minstrel' of Dr Beattie claims a particular share of admiration, and cannot but afford the utmost delight to a mind susceptible of the charms of poetry. His verse is uncommon, but well calculated for his subject. His description of the emanations of infant genius, and of its rise into maturity, is probably quite unequalled. All the charm of Originality, he has all the grace of true poesy and all the advantages of natural genius and taste. And yet 'tis to be regretted that he is rather unequal, though that inequality only serves to render his beauties more striking.

6

The Lay of the Last Minstrel' is also a very fine production, and one which has also the charm of Ori, ginality. The plan is uncommon : the subject very interesting: and the venerable and neglected bard, who thus pours forth the " Song of melody," and strains his efforts to please his amiable and benevolent auditors, never ceases to retain a place in the imagination; which is calculated, so far from diminishing, to heighten the effect of the poem.

The Pleasures of Hope" is a most beautiful production, and exhibits fully as much genius as any late poet has evinced; especially when the youth, and consequent inexperience of the author, are taken into consideration. It is, however, to be regretted, that in the enthusiasm of his passion for liberty, the imagina. tion of the poet seems, now and then, to have carried away the more cool reflection of the man. But even with this fault, if it be a fault in a poet to disregard the colder rules of prudence, the poem-has an infinite degree of merit. It will be read by

the

the present moment, for Ossian just now is all in all-I say, Homer was lately admired as much as he was three thousand years ago. Will the admiration of our Highland bard be as permanent? And will it be as universal as learning itself?

"Knowledge of the human heart is a science of the highest dignity. It is recommended not only by its own importance, but also by this, that none but an exalted genius is capable of it. To delineate the objects of the material world requires a fine imagination, but to penetrate into the mental system, and to describe its different objects, with all their distinguishing (though some times almost imperceptible) peculiarities, requires an imagination far more extensive and vigorous. It is this kind of imagination which appears so conspicuous in the works of Shakespeare and Homer, and which, in my opinion, raises them above all other poets whatsoever; I mean not only that talent by which they can adapt themselves to the heart of their readers, and excite whatever affection they please, in which the former plainly stands unrivalled; I mean also that wonderfully penetrating and plastic faculty, which is capable of representing every species of character, not, as our ordinary poets do, by a high shoulder, a wry mouth, or gigantic stature, but by hitting off, with a delicate hand, the distinguishing feature, and that in such a manner as makes it easily known from all others whatsoever, however similar to a superficial eye. Hotspur and Henry V. are heroes resembling one another, yet very distinct in their characters; Falstaff, and Pistol, and Bardolph, are buffoons, but each in his own way; Desdemona and Juliet are not the same; Bottom, and Dogberry, and the grave diggers, are different characters and the same may be said of the most similar of Homer's cha

racters; each has some mark that makes him essentially different from the rest. But these great masters are not more eminent in distinguishing than in completing their characters. I am a little acquainted with a Cato, a Sempronius, a Tinsel, a Sir Charles Easy, &c. but I am perfectly acquainted with Achilles, Hector, Falstaff, Lear, Pistol, and Quickly; I know them more tha roughly than any other person of my acquaintance.

"If this accurate delineation of character be allowed the highest species of poetry (and this, I think, is generally allowed,) may I not ask whether Ossian is not extremely defective in the highest species of poetry? It is said, indeed, that this poet lived in an age when mankind, being in a state of almost total barbarism, were incapable of that diversity of character which is found in countries improved by commerce and learning, and that therefore he had no materials for a diversity of character. But it is certain that diversities of character are found among the rudest savages ; and it is the poet's business, not to pourtray the characters as they really exist (which is left to the historian,) but to represent them such as they might have existed. But to have done, Ossian seems really to have very little knowledge of the human heart; his chief talent lies in describing inanimate objects, and therefore he belongs (according to my principles,) not to the highest, buc an inferior order of poets."

66

ing it in the rank next to these. As for the other modern attempts at the Epopec," the Henriade" of Voltaire, the "Epigoniad" of WilEpigoniad" of Wil. kie, the "Leonidas" of Glover, not to mention the "Arthur" of Blackmore, they are not to be compared with it. Tasso possesses an exuberant and sublime imagination, though in exuberance it seems, in my opinion, inferior to our Spencer, and in sublimity inferior to Milton. Were I to compare Milton's geuius with Tasso's, I would say that the sublime of the latter is flashy and fluctuating, while that of the former diffuses an uniform, steady, and vigorous blaze: Milton is more majestic, Tasso more dazzling. Dryden, it seems, was of opinion, that the "Jerusalem Delivered" was the only poem of modern times that deserved the name of epic; but it is certain that criticism was not this writer's talent; and I think it is evident, from some passages of his works, that he either did not, or would not, understand the" Paradise Lost." -Tasso borrows his plot and principal characters from Homer, but his manner resembles Virgil's. He is certainly much obliged to Virgil, and scruples not to imitate, nor to translate him on many occasions. In the pathetic he is far inferior both to Homer, to Virgil, and to Milton. His characters, though different, are not always distinct, and want those masterly and distinguishing strokes which the genius of Homer and Shakespeare, and of them only, knows how to delineate. Tasso excels in describing pleasurable scenes, and seems peculiarly fond of such as have a reference to the passion of love. Yet in characterising this passion, he is far inferior, not only to Milton, but also to Virgil, whose fourth book he has been at

POPE'S ESSAY ON MAN.

66

Pope's Essay on Man" is the finest philosophical poem in the world; but it seems to me to do more honour to the imagination than to the understanding of its author: I mean, its sentiments are noble and affecting, its images and allusions apposite, beautiful, and new: its wit transcendently excellent; but the scientific part of it is very exceptionable. Whatever Pope borrows from Leibnitz, like most other metaphysical theories, is frivolous and unsatisfying: what Pope gives us of his own is energetic, irresistible, and divine. The incompatibility of philosophical and poetical genius is, I think, no unaccountable thing. Poetry exhibits the general qualities of a species; philosophy the particular qualities of individuals. This forms its conclusions from a painful and minute examination of single instances: that decides instantaneously, either from its own instinctive sagacity, or from a singular and unaccountable penetration, which at one glance sees all the instances which the philosopher must leisurely and progressively scrutinize, one by one. This persuades you gradually, and by detail; the other overpowers you in an instant by a single effort. Observe the effect of argumentation in poetry; we have too many instances of it in Milton: it transforms the noblest thoughts into drawling inferences, and the most beautiful language into prose: it checks the tide of passion, by giving the mind a differ ent employment in the comparison of ideas. A little philosophical ac

quaintance