Whofe limbs unbury'd on the naked fhore, Since were fonder of fhewing their variety of learning in all kinds, than their fingle understanding in poetry. Hence it comes to pafs that their remarks are rather philofophical, hiftorical, geographical, allegorical, or in fhort rather any thing than critical and poetical. Even the Grammarians, tho' their whole bufinefs and ufe be only to render the words of an author intelligible, are ftrangely touch'd with the pride of doing fomething more than they ought. The grand ambition of one fort of fcholars is to encrease the number of various lections; which they have done to fuch a degree of obfcure diligence, that (as Sir H. Savil obferv'd) we now begin to value the first editions of books as most correct, because they have been least corrected. The prevailing paffion of others is to discover new meanings in an author,whom they will cause to appear myfterious,purely for the vanity of being thought to unravel him. 'These account it a difgrace to be of the opinion of thofe that preceded them; and it is generally the fate of fuch people who will never fay what was faid before, to fay what will never be faid after them. If they can but find a word, that has once been strain'd by fome dark writer, to fignify any thing different from its usual acceptation; it is frequent with them to apply it conftantly to that uncommon meaning, whenever they meet it in a clear writer: For reading is so much dearer to them than fenfe, that they will difcard it at any time to make way for a criticism. In other places where they cannot conteft the truth of the common interpretation, they get themselves room for differtation by imaginary Amphibologies, which they will have to be defign'd by the author. This difpofition of finding out different fignifications in one thing, may be the effect of either too much, or too little wit: For men of a right understanding generally fee at once all that an author can reasonably mean, but others are apt to fanfy two meanings for want of knowing one. Not to add, that there is a vaft deal of difference between the learning of a Critick, and the puzzling of a Grammarian. It is no eafy task to make fomething out of a hundred pedants that is not pedantical; yet this he must do, who would give a tolerable abftract of the former expofitors of Homer. Since great Achilles and Atrides ftrove, Such was the fov'reign doom, and fuch the will of Jove! Declare, Homer. The commentaries of Euftathius are indeed an immenfe treafury of the Greek learning; but as he feems to have amaffed the fubftance of whatever others had written upon the author, fo he is not free from fome of the foregoing cenfures. There are those who have faid, that a judicious abftract of him alone, might furnish out fufficient illuftrations upon Homer. It was refolv'd to take the trouble of reading through that voluminous work, and the reader may be affur'd, thofe remarks that any way concern the Poetry or art of the Poet, are much fewer than is imagin'd. The greater part of thefe is already plunder'd by fucceeding commentators, who have very little but what they owe to him: and I am oblig'd to lay even of Madam Dacier, that she is either more beholden to him than she has confeffed, or has read him less than fhe is willing to own. She has made a farther attempt than her predeceffors to difcover the beauties of the Poet; tho' we have often only her general praises; and exclamations instead of reafons. But her remarks all together are the most judicious collection extant of the scatter'd obfervations of the ancients and moderns, as her preface is excellent, and her tranflation equally careful and elegant. The chief defign of the following notes is to comment upOn Homer as a Poet; whatever in them is extracted from others is conftantly own'd; the remarks of the ancients are generally fet at length, and the places cited: all thofe of Euftathius are collected which fall under this fcheme: many which were not acknowledg'd by other commentators, are reftor'd to the true owner; and the fame juftice is fhewn to those who refus'd it to others. 'HE plan of this poem is form'd upon anger, and its ill rewards and thus every paffion or virtue may be the foundation of the scheme of an Epic poem. This diftinction between two authors who have been fo fuccessful, feem'd neceffary to be taken notice of, that they who would imitate either may not ftumble at the very entrance, or fo curb their imaginations, as to deprive us of noble morals told in a new Declare, O Mufe! in what ill-fated hour 10 Sprung the fierce ftrife, from what offended pow'r? Latona's new variety of accidents. Imitation does not hinder Invention: We may obferve the rules of nature, and write in the fpirit of those who have beft hit upon them; without taking the fame track. beginning in the fame manner, and following the main of their story almoft ftep by step; as most of the modern writers of Epic poetry have done after one of these great Poets .1] Quintilian has told us, that from the beginning of Homer's two poems the rules of all Exordiums were deriv'd. "In pauciffimis verfibus utriufque operis ingreffu, legem Procemiorum 66 non dico fervavit, fed conftituit." Yet Kapin has been very free with this invocation, in his Comparison between Homer and Virgil; which is by no means the moft judicious of his works. He cavils fift at the Poet's infifting fo much upon the effects of A hilles's anger, That it was "the caufe of the woes of the Grecks," that it fent fo many Heroes to the fhades," that "their bodies were left a prey to birds and beafts," the first of which he thinks had been fufficient. One may anfwer, that the woes of Greece might confift in feveral other things than in the death of her Heroes, which was therefore needful to be specify'd: As to the bodies, he might have refle&ei how great a curfe the want of burial was accounted by the aucients, and how prejudicial it was efteem'd even to the fouls of the deceas'd: we have a moft particular example of the ftrength of this opinion from the conduct of Sophocles in hisjax; who thought this very point tufficient to make the diftrefs of the laft act of that tragedy after the death of his Heroe, purely to fatisfy the audience that he obtain'd the rites of fepulture. Next he objects it as prepofterous in Homer to defi.e the Mule to tell him the whole ftory, and at the fame time to inform her folemnly in his own perfon that 'twas the will of Jove which brought it about. But is a poet then to be imagin'd intirely ignorant of his fubject, tho' he invokes the Mufe to relate the particulars? May not Homer be allow'd the knowledge of fo plain a truth, as that the will of God is fulfill'd in all things Nor does his manner of flying this infer that he informs the Mufe of it, but only correfponds with the ufual way of defiring information from another concern Latona's fon a dire contagion spread, And heap'd the camp with mountains of the dead; The ing any thing, and at the fame time mentioning that little we know of it in general. What is there more in this paffage Sing, O Goddefs, that wrath of Achilles, which provd fo pernicious to the Greeks: We only know the ef"fects of it, that it fent innumerable brave men to the "hades, aud that it was Jove's will it fhould be fo. But tell me, O Mufe, what was the fource of this deftru&tive anger?" I can't apprehend what Rapin means by faying, it is hard to know where this invocation ends, and that it is confounded with the narration, which fo manifeftly begins at Antos Aids ÿòs. But upon the whole, methinks the French. Criticks play double with us, when they fometimes reprefent the rules of poetry to be form'd upon the practice of Homer, and at other times arraign their mafter, as if he tranfgrefs'd them. Horace has faid the Exordium of an Epic poem ought to be plain and modeft, and inftances Homer's as fuch; and Rapin from this very rule will be trying Homer and judging it otherwife (for he criticifes alfo upon the beginning of the Qdyey.) But for a full answer we may bring the words of Quintilian (whom Rapin himself allows to be the best of Criticks) concerning thefe propofitions and invocations of our author. "Benevolum auditorem invocatione dearum quas præfidere, "vatibus creditum eft, intentum propofitâ rerum magnitudine, & de"cilem fummâ celeriter comprehenfâ, facit. *. 1.] Μήνιν άειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Αχιλή. Plutarch obferves there is a defect in the measure of this first line (I fuppofe he means in the Eta's of the Patronymick.) This he thinks, the fiery vein of Homer making hafte to his fubject, paft over with a bold neglect, being confcious of his own power and perfection in the greater parts; as fome (fays he) who make virtue their fole aim, pafs by cenfure in smaller But perhaps we may find no occafion to fuppofe this a neglect in him, if we confider that the word Pelides, had he made ule of it without fo many alterations as he has put it to in dew, would ftill have been true to the rules of meafure. Make but a diphtong of the fecond Era and the lota, instead of their being two fyllables (perhaps by the fault of tranfcribers) and the objection is gone. Or perhaps it might matters. be The King of men his rev'rend Prieft defy'd, For be defign'd, that the verfe in which he profeffes to fing of violent anger fhould run off in the rapidity of Da&tyles. This art he is allow'd to have us'd in other places, and Virgil has been particularly celebrated for it. 8. Will of Jove.] Plutarch in his treatise of reading Poets, interprets Ads in this place to fignify Fate, not imagining it confiftent with the goodness of the fupreme being, or Jupiter, to contrive or practife any evil against men. Euftathius makes [Wil] here to refer to the promife which Jupiter gave to Thetis, that he would honour her fon by fiding with Troy while he' fhould be abfent. But to reconcile these two opinions, perhaps the meaning may be, that when Fare had decreed the deftruction of Troy, Jupiter having the power of incidents to bring it to pafs, fulfill'd that decree by providing means for it. So that the words may thus fpecify the time of action, from the beginning of the poem, in which thofe incidents work'd, 'till the promise to Thetis was fulfil'd, and the deftruction of Tray afcertain'd to the Greeks by the death of Hector. However it is certain that this Poet was not an abfolute Fatalift, but ftill fuppos'd the power of fove fuperior: For in the fixteenth Iliad we fee him defigning to fave Sarpedon, tho' the Fates had decreed his death, if Juno had not interpofed. Neither does he exclude free-will in men ; for as he attributes the deftruction of the Heroes to the will of Jove in the beginning of the Iliad, fo he attributes the deftruction of Ulyffes's friends to their own folly in the beginning of the Odyffes. Αὐτῇ γδ σφετέρησιν ατασθαλίησιν ὅλοντο. 9. Declare, O Mufe.] It may be queftion'd whether the frft period ends at Διὸς δ' ετελείετο βολὴ, and the interrogation to the Mufe begins with F dù và @gare —Or whether the period does not end 'till the words, i 'Axınad's, with only a fingle interrogation at Τις τ ̓ ἄς' σφωε θεών. I fhould be inclin'd to favour the former, and think it a double interrogative, as Milton feems to have done in his imitation of this place at the beginning of his Paradise loft. Say |