Page images
PDF
EPUB

formed that I am taxed of Partiality, in not mentioning an Author whose Eclogues are published in the same Volume with Mr. Philips's; I shall employ this Paper in Observations upon him, written in the free Spirit of Criticism, and without Apprehenfion of offending that Gentleman, whose Character it is that he takes the greatest Care of his Works before they are published, and has the least Concern for them afterwards.

2. I have laid it down as the first Rule of Pastoral, that its Ideas should be taken from the Manners of the Golden Age, and the Moral form'd upon the Representation of Innocence; 'tis therefore plain that any Deviations from that Design degrade a Poem from being true Paftoral. In this View it will appear that Virgil can only have two of his Eclogues allow'd to be such: His first and ninth must be rejected, because they describe the Ravages of Armies, and Oppreffions of the Innocent; Corydon's criminal Paffion for Alexis throws out the second; the Calumny and Railing in the third are not proper to that State of Concord; the eighth represents unlawful Ways of procuring Love by Inchantments, and introduces a Shepherd whom an inviting Precipice tempts to Self-Murder. As to the fourth, fixth, and tenth, they are given up by (*) Heinfius, Salmafius, Rapin, and the Criticks in general. They likewise observe, that but eleven of all the Idyllia of Theocritus are to be admitted as Pastorals; and even out of that Number the greater Part will be excluded for one or other of the Reafons abovemention'd. So that when I remark'd in a former Paper, that Virgil's Eclogues taken all together are rather select Poems than Paftorals; I might have said the same Thing with

(*) See Rapin de Carm. Past. par. 5.

with no less Truth of Theocritus. The Reason of this I take to be yet unobserved by the Criticks, viz. They never meant them all for Paftorals.

Now it is plain Philips hath done this, and in that Particular excelled both Theocritus and Virgil.

3. As Simplicity is the diftinguishing Characteristick of Paftoral, Virgil hath been thought guilty of too courtly a Style; his Language is perfectly pure, and he often forgets he is among Peafants. I have frequently wondered, that since he was so conversant in the Writings of Ennius, he had not imitated the Rusticity of the Doric, as well by the Help of the old obsolete Roman Language, as Philips hath by the antiquated English: For Example, might he not have faid Quoi instead of Cui; quicijum for cujum; volt for vult, &c. as well as our Modern hath Welladay for Alas, whilome for of old, make mock for deride, and witless Younglings for innocent Lambs, &c. by which Means he had attained as much of the Air of Theocritus, as Philips hath of Spencer?

4. Mr. Pope hath fallen into the same Error with Virgil. His Clowns do not converse in all the Simplicity proper to the Country: His Names are borrow'd from Theocritus and Virgil, which are improper to the Scene of his Paftorals. He introduces Daphnis, Alexis, and Thyrfis on British Plains, as Virgil hath done before him on the Mantuan : Whereas Philips, who hath the strictest Regard to Propriety, makes choice of Names peculiar to the Country, and more agreeable to a Reader of Delicacy; such as Hobbinol, Lobbin, Cuddy, and Colin Clout.

5. So easy as Paftoral Writings may feem, (in the Simplicity we have described it) yet it requires great Reading, both of the Antients and Moderns, to be a Master of it. Philips hath given us manifest Proofs

of

of his Knowledge of Books: It must be confessed his Competitor hath imitated some single Thoughts of the Antients well enough, if we consider he had not the Happiness of an University Education, but he hath dispersed them, here and there, without that Order and Method which Mr. Philips observes, whose whole third Pastoral is an Instance how well he hath studied the fifth of Virgil, and how judiciously reduced Virgil's Thoughts to the Standard of Pastoral; as his Contention of Colin Clout and the Nightingale shows with what Exactness he hath imitated every Line in Strada.

6. When I remarked it as a principal Fault, to introduce Fruits and Flowers of a Foreign Growth, in Descriptions where the Scene lies in our own Country, I did not design that Observation should extend also to Animals, or the sensitive Life; for Philips hath with great Judgment described Wolves in England in his first Pastoral. Nor would I have a Poet slavishly confine himself (as Mr. Pope hath done) to one particular Season of the Year, one certain Time of the Day, and one unbroken Scene in each Eclogue: 'Tis plain Spencer neglected this Pedantry, who in his Paftoral of November mentions the mournful Song of the Nightingale:

Sad Philomel her Song in Tears doth steep.

And Mr. Philips, by a poetical Creation, hath raised up finer Beds of Flowers than the most industrious Gardener; his Rofes, Endives, Lillies, Kingcups, and Daffadils blow all in the fame Season.

7. But the better to discover the Merits of our two contemporary Paftoral Writers, I shall endeavour to draw a Parallel of them, by fetting several of their particular Thoughts in the same Light, whereby it will be obvious how much Philips hath the Advantage. With what Simplicity he introduces two Shepherds singing alternately?

Hobb. Come Rosalind, O come, for without thee What Pleasure can the Country have for me : Come Rofalind, O come; my brinded Kine, My snowy Sheep, my Farm, and all, is thine.

Lang. Come Rosalind, O come; here shady Bowers
Here are cool Fountains, and here springing
Flow'rs.

Come Rofalind; here ever let us stay,
And sweetly waste our live-long Time away.

Our other Paftoral Writer, in expreffing the same
Thought, deviates into downright Poetry.

Streph. In Spring the Fields, in Autumn Hills I love, At Morn the Plains, at Noon the shady Grove, But Delia always; forc'd from Delia's Sight, Nor Plains at Morn, nor Groves at Noon delight.

Daph. Sylvia's like Autumn ripe, yet mild as May, More bright than Noon, yet fresh as early Day; Ev'n Spring displeases, when she shines not here, But blest with her 'tis Spring throughout the Year.

In the first of these Authors, two Shepherds thus innocently describe the Behaviour of their Mistresses.

Hobb. As Marian bath'd, by chance I passed by, She blush'd, and at me cast a fide-long Eye: Then swift beneath the chrystal Wave she try'd Her beauteous Form, but all in vain to hide.

Lang.

Lang. As I to cool me bath'd one sultry Day,
Fond Lydia lurking in the Sedges lay.
The Wanton laugh'd, and seem'd in haste to fly;
Yet often stopp'd, and often turn'd her Eye.

The other Modern (who it must be confess'd hath a Knack of Verfifying) hath it as follows:

Streph. Me gentle Delia beckons from the Plain, Then, hid in Shades, eludes her eager Swain; But feigns a Laugh, to see me search around, And by that Laugh the willing Fair is found.

Daph. The sprightly Sylvia trips along the Green, She runs, but hopes she does not run unseen; While a kind Glance at her Pursuer flies,

How much at Variance are her Feet and Eyes!

There is nothing the Writers of this Kind of Poetry are fonder of, than Descriptions of Paftoral Presents. Philips says thus of a Sheep-hook.

Of season'd Elm; where Studs of Brass appear,
To speak the Giver's Name, the Month and Year.
The Hook of polish'd Steel, the Handle turn'd,
And richly by the Graver's Skill adorn'd.

The other of a Bowl emboss'd with Figures.

where wanton Ivy twines,
And swelling Clusters bend the curling Vines;
Four Figures rifing from the Work appear,
The various Seafons of the rolling Year;
And What is that which binds the radiant Sky,
Where twelve brightSigns in beauteous Order lie.

The

« EelmineJätka »