as he is speaking of the river Thames; and has rendered it "Thames heard the numbers as he flow'd along, "And bade his willows learn the moving fong *." Our critic objects that "a mixture of British and Grecian ideas, may be justly deemed a blemish in the PASTORALS of POPE: and propriety," he adds, "is certain to be violated when he couples Pactolus with the Thames,' &c. How far fuch a violation is to be imputed to our poet, let the lines from the mouth of the fhepherd fpeak for themselves. "O'er golden fands let rich Pactolus flow, "And trees weep amber on the banks of Po; Bleft Thames's fhores the brightest beauties ·" yield †, "Feed here, my lambs, I'll feek no distant field.” *The author of the Elements of Criticism, objects to this defcriptive perfonification, as deftitute of resemblance to any thing real. "Admitting," fays he, "that a river gently flowing, may be imagined a fenfible being listening to a fong; I cannot enter into the conceit of the river's ordering his laurels to learn the fong: here all refemblance to any thing real is loft. This, however," he concludes, “is copied literally by one of our greatest poets. It must indeed be confefled, that this fiction of the imagination, is, in the foregoing inftance, ufed rather licentioufly. But the critic is mistaken in faying, that our author has copied the original literally; fince, as above obferved, he has very judiciously changed the image, though he has given full fcope to the fiction. The third line of this ftanza, is very far from being fmooth and harmonious. The genitive cafe hangs upon the tongue, and befide, occafions a very difagreeable hifing. What What the critic means by coupling Pactolus with Thames, it is not easy to conjecture. They ftand evidently contradiftinguished: and furely the poet might draw a contraft from Greece, without being chargeable with a faulty mixture of British and Grecian ideas. Ever partial to his favourite Sicilian, the critic prefers his imagery to Mr. POPE's in the following inftance. "A fhepherd," fays he, per "in Theocritus, wishes with much tenderness and elegance, both which muft fuffer in a literal tranflation, "Would I could become a murmuring bee, fly into your grotto, and be mitted to creep among the leaves of ivy and fern, that compofe the chaplet which adorns your head." POPE, he obferves, has thus altered this image: "Oh! were I made by fome transforming pow'r "The captive bird that fings within thy bow'r ! "Then might my voice thy lift'ning ears employ, And I thofe kiffes he receives, enjoy." "On three accounts," he concludes, "the foregoing image is preferable to the latter. For the pastoral wildness, delicacy, and uncommonnefs of the thought." It is somewhat strange that the critic should applaud the Greek image for the uncommonnefs of the thought: fince it is the perfection of paftoral D 3 toral images to be fimple and natural. The beauty of this kind of poetry, arifes from a natural ease of thought, and fmoothnefs of verfe. Now nothing can be more fimple and natural, and at the fame time more plaintive and pathetic, than the image of Mr. POPE; nor can any thing be expreffed with greater beauty, and harmony of numbers *. A lover who wishes for a metamorphofis, for the fake of approaching more closely to his mistress, would undoubtedly wish to be transformed into fomething which might be the object of her careffes, and not into that from which fhe would fhrink and retire. The image in Theocritus is ftrained and unnatural: that in POPE is natural and fervid. The pleasure which the fhepherd in Theocritus proposes from his transformation, of creeping among the leaves of ivy and fern which compofe his mistress's chaplet, is cold and infipid, compared to the animated and glowing with of POPE's fhepherd, who longs to fupplant his feathered rival; and dwell upon the enchanting lip of his favourite fair. *Perhaps, however, in point of ftrict propriety, the word employ, in the third line, is not happily chofen. To employ, is to call forth the exertion of fome active faculty. But the ear in liftening is paffive: and if the rhyme would have admitted, the verb engage fhould feem moft proper. Impartial judgment muft, nevertheless, in fome degree, fubfcribe to the propriety of our critic's animadverfion on the riddle of the Royal oak, in the first pastoral, which is in imitation of the Virgilian enigma; and, as he well obferves, favours of pun and puerile conceit. Say, Daphnis, fay, in what glad foil appears, "A wond'rous tree that facred monarchs bears ?" "With what propriety, the critic asks, could the tree whofe fhade protected the King, be faid to be prolific of princes?" Here however, there does not feem to be the impropriety which the critic apprehends. For the tree, by preferving the royal line, may, not improperly, be faid to be prolific of Princes. After all, if idle riddles be a rural amusement all the world over, there can be no great no great objection to their being introduced in paftoral scenes: and if reafon would not justify the use of them without example, our bard could fhelter himfelf under no authority more unexceptionable than that of Virgil. Among these paftorals, the most confpicuous is the Meffiah, a facred eclogue, in imitation of Virgil's Pollio*. This, the critic allows to be *It is but just to obferve, that our critic has corrected a grammatical error in the Meffiah, where our poet should have faid, The fwain- "Shall START amidst the thirsty wild to hear fuperior to the Pollio: and indeed, if Mr. POPE had given no other inftance of the fublime, this alone would prove the fublimity of his genius †. How folemn and awful is the following invocation! "O Thou my voice infpire "Who touch'd Ifaiah's hallow'd lips with fire !" In what a bold exalted ftrain, does the poet break forth, "Hark! a glad voice the lonely defart cheers i Lo, earth receives him from the bending (kies! "Sink down, ye mountains, and, ye vallies, rife; "With heads declin'd, ye cedars, homage pay: "Be fmooth, ye rocks; ye rapid floods, give way! "The Saviour comes! by antient bards foretold: "Hear him, ye deaf, and, all ye blind, behold.” Upon the whole, it is not too much to say of thefe paftorals, that though they are professedly imitations of the antients; yet there are few paffages, which our poet has borrowed, withcut improving them; as the reader may judge by comparing the imitations with the originals, Sir Richard Steele, in one of his letters to our author, fpeaking of his eclogue, fays," I have turned to every verfe and chapter, and think you have preferved the fublime heavenly spirit throughout the whole.” |