fubject and intention was the regulation of the Roman Stage." How far I may differ concerning particular paffages, will appear from the notes at the end of this tranflation. In controverfial criticism difference of opinion cannot but be expreffed, (veniam, petimufque damufque viciffim,) but I hope I fhall not be thought to have delivered my fentiments with petulance, or be accused of want of refpect for a character, that I most fincerely reverence and ad mire. I now proceed to fet down in writing, the subftance of what I fuggefted to you in conversation, concerning my own conceptions of the end and defign of Horace in this Epiftle. In this explanation I shall call upon Horace as my chief witness, and the Epiftle itself, as my principal voucher. Should their teftimonies prove adverse, my system must be abandoned, like many that have preceded it, as vain and chimerical and if it fhould even, by their fupport, be acknowledged and received, it will, I think, like the egg of Columbus, appear so plain, easy, and obvious, that it will feem almoft wonderful, that the Epiftle has never been confidered in the fame light, till now. I do not wish to dazzle with the luftre of a new hypothefis, which requires, I think, neither neither the strong opticks, nor powerful glaffes, of a critical Herschel, to afcertain the truth of it; but is a fyftem, that lies level to common apprehenfion, and a luminary, discoverable by the naked eye. My notion is fimply this. I conceive that one of the fons of Pifo, undoubtedly the Elder, had either written, or meditated, a poetical work, most probably a Tragedy; and that he had, with the knowledge of the family, communicated his piece, or intention, to Horace: but Horace, either disapproving of the work, or doubting of the poetical faculties of the Elder Pifo, or both, wifhed to diffuade him from all thoughts of publication. With this view he formed the defign of writing this Epiftle, addreffing it, with a courtlinefs and delicacy perfectly agreeable to his acknowledged character, indifferently to the whole family, the father and his two fons. Epiftola ad Pifones, de Arte Poeticâ. He begins with general reflections, generally addreffed to his three friends. Credite, PISONES!PATER, & JUVENES patre digni !-In these preliminary rules, equally neceffary to be observed by Poets of every denomination, he dwells on the neceffity of unity of defign, the danger of being dazzled by the fplendor fplendor of partial beauties, the choice of fubjects, the beauty of order, the elegance and propriety of diction, and the use of a thorough knowledge of the nature of the feveral different species of Poetry : fumming up this introductory portion of his Epiftle, in a manner perfectly agreeable to the conclufion of it. Defcriptas fervare vices, operumque colores, From this general view of poetry, on the canvas of Ariftotle, but entirely after his own manner, the writer proceeds to give the rules and hiftory of the Drama; adverting principally to Tragedy, with all its constituents and appendages of diction, fable, character, incidents, chorus, measure, musick, and decoration. In this part of the work, according to the interpretation of the best Criticks, and indeed (I think) according to the manifest tenor of the Epiftle, he addreffes himself entirely to the two young gentlemen, pointing out to them the difficulty, as well as ex, cellence, of the Dramatick Art; insisting on the avowed fuperiority of the Græcian Writers, and afcribing the comparative failure of the Romans to negligence and avarice. The Poet, having exhaufted exhaufted this part of his fubject, fuddenly drops a fecond, difmiffing at once no less than two of the three Perfons, to whom he originally addreffed his Epiftle, and turning short on the ELDER PISO, moft earnestly conjures him to ponder on the danger of precipitate publications, and the ridicule to which the author of wretched poetry exposes himself. From the commencement of this partial addrefs, O MAJOR JUVENUM, &c. [v. 366] to the end of the poem, almost a fourth part of the whole, the fecond perfon plural, Pifones!-Vos !-Vos, O Pompilius Sanguis! &c. is difcarded, and the fecond perfon fingular, Tu, Te, Tibi, &c. invariably takes its place. The arguments too are equally relative and perfonal; not only fhewing the neceffity of study, combined with natural genius, to conftitute a Poet; but dwelling on the peculiar danger and delufion of flattery, to a writer of rank and fortune; as well as the ineftimable value of an honest friend, to rescue him from derifion and contempt. The Poet, however, in reverence to the Mufe, qualifies his exaggerated description of an infatuated fcribbler, with a moft noble encomium on the uses of Good Poetry, vindicating the dignity of the Art, and proudly afferting, that the moft exalted characters would not be difgraced by the cultivation of it. VOL. III. C Ne Ne forte pudori Sit tibi Mufa, lyre folers, & Cantor Apollo. It is worthy observation, that in the fatyrical picture of a frantick bard, with which Horace concludes his Epiftle, he not only runs counter to what might be expected as a Corollary of an Essay on the Art of Poetry, but contradicts his own usual practice and fentiments. In his Epiftle to Auguftus, inftead of ftigmatizing the love of verfe as an abominable phrenfy, he calls it (levis hæc infania) a flight madnefs, and defcants on its good effects➡quantas vIRTUTES habeat, fic collige! In another Epiftle, speaking of himfelf, and his addiction to poetry, he fays, ubi quid datur oti, Illudo chartis; hoc eft, MEDIOCRIBUS ILLIS All which, and feveral other paffages in his works, almoft demonftrate that it was not, without a par ticular purpose in view, that he dwelt fo forcibly on the description of a man refolved in fpite Of nature and his ftars to write. T. |