Fable may be divided into the probable, the allegorical and the marvellous. The probable fable is the recital of fuch actions as though they did not happen, yet might, in the common course of nature: Or of fuch as though they did, become fables by the additional epifodes and manner of telling them. Of this fort is the main ftory of an Epic poem, the return of Ulyffes, the fettlement of the Trojans in Italy, or the like. That of the Iliad is the anger of Achilles, the most short and fingle fubject that ever was chofen by any Foet. Yet this he has fupplied with a vafter variety of incidents and events, and crouded with a greater number of councils, fpeeches, battles, and epifodes of all kinds, than are to be found even in those poems whose schemes are of the utmoft latitude and irregularity. The ac-: tion is hurry'd on with the most vehement fpirit, and its whole duration employs not fo much as fifty days. Virgil, for want of fo warm a genius, aided himfelf by taking in a more extenfive subject, as well as a greater length of time, and contracting the defign of both Homer's poems into one, which is yet but a fourth part as large as his. The other Epic Poets have used the fame practice, but generally carry'd it fo far as to fuperinduce a multiplicity of fables, deftroy the unity of action, and lofe their readers in an unreasonable length of time. Nor is it only in the main design that they have been unable to add to his invention, but they have followed him in every episode and part of story. If he has given a regular catalogue of an army, they all draw up their forces in the fame order. If he has funeral games for Patroclus, Virgil has the fame for Anchifes, and Statius (rather than omit them) destroys the unity of his action for those of Archemoras. If Ulyes vifits the fhades, the Eneas of Virgil and Scipio of Silius are fent after him. If he be detain'd from his return by the allurements of Calypfo, fo is Æneas by Dido, and Rinaldo by Armida. If Achilles be abfent from the army on the fcore of a quarrel through half

the

the poem, Rinaldo must absent himself just as long, on the like account. If he gives his hero a fuit of cele-. ftial armour, Virgil and Tafso make the fame prefent to theirs. Virgil has not only observ'd this clofe imitation of Homer, but where he had not led the way, fupply'd the want from other Greek authors. Thus the ftory of Sinon and the taking of Troy was copied (fays Macrobius) almoft word for word from Pifander, as the Loves of Dido and Eneas are taken from thofe of Medea and Fafon in Apollonius, and feveral others in the fame manner.

To proceed to the allegorical fable: If we reflect upon thofe innumerable knowledges, thofe fecrets of nature and phyfical philosophy, which Homer is generally supposed to have wrapped up in his allegories, what a new and ample scene of wonder may this confideration afford us? How fertile will that imagination appear, which was able to clothe all the properties of elements, the qualifications of the mind, the virtues and vices, in forms and perfons; and to introduce them into actions agreeable to the nature of the things they fhadow'd? This is a field in which no fucceeding poets could difpute with Homer; and whatever commendations have been allow'd them on this head, are by no means for their invention in having inlarged his circle, but for their judgment in having contracted it. For when the mode of learning changed in following ages, and science was delivered in a plainer manner; it then became as reasonable in the more modern poets to-lay it afide, as it was in Homer to make use of it. And perhaps it was no unhappy circumftance for Virgil, that there was not in his time that demand upon him of fo great an invention, as might be capable of furnishing all thofe allegorical parts of a poem.

The marvellous fable includes whatever is fupernatural, and efpecially the machines of the Gods. He seems the first who brought them into a fyftem of machinery for poetry, and fuch a one as makes its greatest

A 4

importance

importance and dignity. For we find thofe authors who have been offended at the literal notion of the Gods, conftantly laying their accufation against Homer as the chief fupport of it. But whatever cause there might be to blame his machines in a philofophical or religious view, they are fo perfect in the poetic, that mankind have been ever fince contented to follow them. None have been able to inlarge the sphere of poetry beyond the limits he has fet: Every attempt of this nature has prov'd unsuccessful; and after all the various changes of times and religions, his Gods continue to this day the Gods of poetry.

We come now to the characters of his perfons, and here we fhall find no author has ever drawn fo many, with fo vifible and furprizing a variety, or given us fuch lively and affecting impreffions of them. Every one has fomething fo fingularly his own, that no painter could have diftinguish'd them more by their features, than the Poet has by their manners. Nothing can be more exact than the diftinétions he has obferv'd in the

different degrees of virtues and vices. The fingle qua lity of courage is wonderfully diversify'd in the feveral characters of the Iliad. That of Abilles is furious and intractable; that of Diemede forward, yet liftening to advice and fubject to command: That of Ajax is heavy, and felf confiding; of Hector, active and vigilant: The courage of Agamemnon is infpirited by love of empire and ambition; that of Menelaus mix'd with fofinefs and tenderness for his people: We find in Idomenus a plain direct foldier; in Sarpedon a gallant and generous one. Nor is this judicious and aflonishing diverfity to be found only in the principal quality which conftitutes the main of each character, but even in the underparts of it, to which he takes care to give a tincture of that principal one. For example, the main characters of Ulyffes and Neftor confift in wisdom; and they are diftinct in this, that the wisdom of one is artificial and various, of the other natural, open, and regular.

But

But they have, befides, characters of courage; and this quality alfo takes a different turn in each from the difference of his prudence; for one in the war depends ftill upon caution, the other upon experience. It would

be endless to produce inftances of thefe kinds. The characters of Virgil are far from striking us in this open manner; they lie in a great degree hidden and undiftinguish'd, and where they are mark'd most evidently, affect us not in proportion to thofe of Homer. His characters of valour are much alike; even that of Turnus seems no way peculiar, but as it is in a fuperior degree; and we fee nothing that differences the courage of Mneftheus from that of Sergefthus, Cloanthus, or the reft. In like manner it may be remarked of Statius's heroes, that an air of impetuofity runs thro' them all; the fame horrid and favage courage appears in his Capaneus, Tydeus, Hippomedon, &c. They have a parity of character, which makes them feem brothers of one family. I believe when the reader is led into this track of reflection, if he will purfue it thro' the Epic and Tragic writers, he will be convinced how infinitely fu perior in this point the invention of Homer was to that of all others.

The fpeeches are to be confider'd as they flow from the characters, being perfect or defective as they agree or difagree with the manners of those who utter them. As there is more variety of characters in the Iliad, í there is of fpeeches, than in any other poem. Every thing in it has manners (as Aristotle expreffes it) that is, every thing is acted or fpoken. It is hardly credible in a work of fuch length, how_fmall a number of lines are employ'd in narration. In Virgil the dramatic part is lefs in proportion to the narrative; and the fpeeches often confift of general reflections or thoughts, which might be equally juft in any perfon's mouth upon the fame occafion. As many of his perfons have no appa rent characters, fo many of his fpeeches efcape being apply'd and judg'd by the rule of propriety. We oft

AS

ner

ner think of the author himself when we read Virgit, than when we are engag'd in Homer: All which are the effects of a colder invention, that interests us lefs in the action defcrib'd: Homer makes us hearers, and Virgil leaves us readers.

If in the next place we take a view of the fentiments, the fame prefiding faculty is eminent in the fublimity and spirit of his thoughts. Longinus has given his opinion, that it was in this part Homer principally excell'd. What were alone fufficient to prove the grandeur and excellence of his fentiments in general, is, that they have so remarkable a parity with thofe of the fcripture: Duport in his Gnomologia Homerica, has, collected innumerable inftances of this fort. And it is with justice an excellent modern writer allows, that if Virgil has not fo many thoughts that are low and volgar, he has not fo many that are fublime and noble; and that the Roman author feldom rifes into very astonishing fentiments where he is not fired by the Iliad.

If we observe his defcriptions, images, and fimiles, we fhall find the invention ftill predominant. To what elle can we afcribe that vaft comprehenfion of images of every fort, where we fee each circumftance of art, and individual of nature fummon'd together, by the extent and fecundity of his imagination; to which all things, in their various views, prefented themfelves in an inftant, and had their impreffions taken off to perfection, at a heat? Nay, he not only gives us the full profpects of things, but feveral unexpected peculiarities and fideviews, unobferv'd by any Painter but Homer. Nothing is fo furprizing as the defcriptions of his battels, which take up no less than half the Iliad, and are supply'd with fo valt a variety of incidents, that no one bears a likeness to another; fuch different kinds of deaths, that no two heroes are wounded in the fame manner; and fuch a profufion of noble ideas, that every battle rifes above the last in greatness, horror, and confufion. It is certain there is not near that number of images and

defcriptions