vention in that. He was not fatisfy'd with his language as he found it fettled in any one part of Greece, but fearch'd thro' its differing dialects with this particular view, to beautify and perfect his numbers: He confider'd these as they had a greater mixture of vowels or confonants, and accordingly employed them as the verfe required either a greater fmoothness or ftrength. What he most affected was the Ionic, which has a peculiar fweetnefs from its never ufing contractions, and from its custom of refolving the diphthongs into two fyllables; fo as to make the words open themselves with a more spreading and sonorous fluency. With this he mingled the Attic contractions, the broader Doric, and the feebler Eolic, which often rejects its afpirate, or takes off its accent; and compleated this variety by altering fome letters with the licence of poetry. Thus his measures, instead of being fetters to his fenfe, were always in readiness. to run along with the warmth of his rapture, and even to give a further representation of his notions, in the correspondence of their founds to what they fignified. Out of all these he has derived that harmony, which makes us confefs he had not only the richest head, but the finest ear in the world. This is fo great a truth, that whoever will but confult the tune of his verses, even without understanding them (with the fame fort of diligence as we daily fee practifed in the case of Italian Operas) will find more sweetness, variety, and majesty of found, than in any other language or poetry. The beauty of his numbers is allowed by the criticks to be copied but faintly by Virgil himself, though they are fo juft to afcribe it to the nature of the Latin tongue: Indeed the Greek has fome advantages both from the natural found of its words, and the turn and cadence of its verfe, which agree with the genius of no other language. Virgil was

X 3

very

very fenfible of this, and used the utmost diligence in working up a more intractable language to whatsoever graces it was capable of; and in particular never failed to bring the found of his line to a beautiful agreement with its fenfe. If the Grecian poet has not been fo frequently celebrated on this account as the Roman, the only reafon is, that fewer criticks have understood one language than the other. Dionyfius of Halicarnaffus has pointed out many of our author's beauties in this kind, in his treatife of the Compofition of Words, and others will be taken notice of in the courfe of my Notes. It fuffices at present to obferve of his numbers, that they flow with fo much ease, as to make one imagine Homer had no other care than to transcribe as faft as the Mufes dictated; and at the fame time with fo much force and infpiriting vigour, that they awaken and raife us like the found of a trumpet. They roll along as a plentiful river, always in motion, and always full; while we are borne away by a tide of verfe, the most rapid, and yet the most smooth imaginable.

Thus on whatever fide we contemplate Homer, what principally ftrikes us is his invention. It is that which forms the character of each part of his work; and accordingly we find it to have made his fable more extenfive and copious than any other, his manners more lively and strongly marked, his fpeeches more affecting and tranfported, his fentiments more warm and fublime, his images and defcriptions more full and animated, his expreffion more rais'd and daring, and his numbers more rapid and various. I hope, in what has been faid of Virgil, with regard to any of these heads, I have no way derogated from his character. Nothing is more abfurd or endless, than the common method of comparing eminent writers by an oppofition

pofition of particular paffages in them, and forming a judgment from thence of their merit upon the whole. We ought to have a certain knowledge of the principal character and distinguishing excellence of each: It is in that we are to confider him, and in proportion to his degree in that we are to admire him. No author or man ever excelled all the world in more than one faculty; and as Homer has done this in invention, Virgil has in judgment. Not that we are to think Homer wanted judgment, because Virgil had it in a more eminent degree; or that Virgil wanted invention, because Homer poffeft a larger share of it: Each of these great authors had more of both than perhaps any man befides, and are only faid to have lefs in comparison with one another. Homer was the greater genius, Virgil the better artist. In one we most admire the man, in the other the work. Homer hurries and tranfports us with a commanding impetuofity. Virgil leads us with an attractive majefty: Homer fcatters with a generous profufion, Virgil beftows with a careful magnificence: Homer, like the Nile, pours out his riches with a boundlefs overflow; Virgil, like a river in its banks, with a gentle and conftant ftream. When we behold their battles, methinks the two Poets refemble the Heroes they celebrate: Homer, boundless and irrefiftible as Achilles, bears all before him, and shines more and more as the tumult increases; Virgil, calmly daring like Æneas, appears undisturbed in the midst of the action; difpofes all about him, and conquers with tranquillity. And when we look upon their machines, Homer feems like his own Jupiter in his terrors, fhaking Olympus, fcattering the lightnings, and firing the Heavens; Virgil, like the fame power in his benevolence, counselling with the Gods, laying plans for empires, and regularly ordering his whole creation. + X 4

But

But after all, it is with great parts as with great virtues, they naturally border on, fome imperfection; and it is often hard to distinguish exactly where the virtue ends, or the fault begins. As prudence may fometimes fink to fufpicion, fo may a great judgment decline to coldness; and as magnanimity may run up to profufion or extravagance, fo may a great invention to redundancy or wildness. If we look upon Homer in this view, we shall perceive the chief objections against him to proceed from fo noble a cause as the excefs of this faculty.

Among these we may reckon fome of his marvellous fictions, upon which fo much criticism has been spent, as furpaffing all the bounds of probability. Perhaps it may be with great and superior fouls, as with gigantick bodies, which exerting themselves with unufual ftrength, exceed what is commonly thought the due proportion of parts, to become miracles in the whole; and like the old heroes of that make, commit fomething near extravagance, amidst a series of glorious and inimitable performances. Thus Homer has his Speaking horses, and Virgil his myrtles diftilling blood, where the latter has not fo much as contrived the eafy intervention of a Deity to fave the probability.

It is owing to the fame vaft invention, that his Similes have been thought too exuberant and full of circumftances. The force of this faculty is seen in nothing more, than in its inability to confine itself to that fingle circumftance upon which the comparison is grounded: It runs out into embellifhments of additional images, which however are fo managed as not to overpower the main one. His fimiles are like pictures, where the principal figure has not only its proportion given agreeable to the original, but is alfo fet off with occafional ornaments and profpects. The fame will account

for

for his manner of heaping a number of comparifons together in one breath, when his fancy fuggested to him at once fo many various and correlpondent images. The reader will eafily extend this obfervation to more objections of the fame kind.

If there are others which feem rather to charge him with a defect or narrowness of genius, than an excess of it; thofe feeming defects will be found upon examination to proceed wholly from the nature of the times he lived in. Such are his grofSer reprefentations of the Gods, and the vicious and imperfect manners of his Heroes, which will be treated of in the following* Essay: But I must here speak a word of the latter, as it is a point generally carried into extremes, both by the cenfurers and defenders of Homer. It must be a ftrange partiality to antiquity, to think with Madam Dacier, that + thofe times and manners are so much "the more excellent, as they are more contrary "to ours." Who can be fo prejudiced in their fa vour as to magnify the felicity of those ages, when a fpirit of revenge and cruelty, joined with the practice of rapine and robbery, reign'd thro' the world; when no mercy was fhown but for the fake of lucre, when the greatest Princes were put to the fword, and their wives and daughters made flaves and concubines? On the other fide, I would not be fo delicate as those modern critics, who are fhocked at the fervile offices and mean employments in which we fometimes fee the Heroes of Homer engaged. There is a pleasure in taking a view of that fimplicity in oppofition to the luxury of fucceeding ages, in beholding Monarchs without their guards, Princes tending their flocks, and * See the Articles of Theology and Morality, in the part of the Effay.

third

Preface to her Homer.

Princeffes