tributed to lift this aftonishing man, to the glory of being efteemed the most original THINKER and SPEAKER, fince the times of Homer." To this extract I may add the sentiments of Dr. Edward Young on the fame occafion. "Who knows whether Shakspeare might not have thought lefs, if he had read more? Who knows if he might not have laboured under the load of Jonfon's learning, as Enceladus under Etna? His mighty genius, indeed, through the moft mountainous oppreffion would have breathed out fome of his inextinguishable fire; yet poffibly, he might not have rifen up into that giant, that much more than common man, at which we now gaze with amazement and delight. Perhaps he was as learned as his dramatick province required; for whatever other learning he wanted, he was mafter of two books, which the laft conflagration alone can destroy; the book of nature, and that of man. Thefe he had by heart, and has tranfcribed many admirable pages of them into his immortal works. These are the fountain-head, whence the Caftalian streams of original compofition flow; and these are often mudded by other waters, though waters in their diftin&t channel, most wholefome and pure; as two chemical liquors, feparately clear as cryftal, grow foul by mixture, and offend the fight. So that he had not only as much learning as his dramatick province required, but, perhaps as it could fafely bear. If Milton had fpared fome of his learning, his mufe would have gained more glory than he would have loft by it." Conjectures on Original Compofition. The first remark of Voltaire on this tragedy, is that the former king had been poifoned by his brother and his queen. The guilt of the latter, however, is far from being ascertained. The Ghoft forbears to accufe her as an acceffary, and very forcibly recommends her to the mercy of her fon. I may add, that her confcience appears undisturbed during the exhibition of the mock tragedy, which produces fo vifible a diforder in her husband who was really criminal. The laft obfervation of the fame author has no greater degree of veracity to boast of; for now, fays he, all the actors in the piece are fwept away, and one Monfieur Fortenbras is introduced to conclude it. Can this be true, when Horatio, Ofrick, Voltimand, and Cornelius furvive? Thefe, together with the whole court of Denmark, are fuppofed to be prefent at the cataftrophe, fo that we are not indebted to the Norwegian chief for having kept the stage from vacancy. Monfieur de Voltaire has fince transmitted, in an epistle to the Academy of Belles Lettres, fome remarks on the late French tranflation of Shakspeare; but, alas! no traces of genius or vigour are discoverable in this crambe repetita, which is notorious only for its infipidity, fallacy, and malice. It ferves indeed to show an appa rent decline of talents and spirit in its writer, who no longer relies on his own ability to depreciate a rival, but appeals in a plaintive ftrain to the queen and princeffes of France for their affiftance to stop the further circulation of Shakspeare's renown. pre Impartiality, nevertheless, muft acknowledge that his private correfpondence difplays a fuperior degree of animation. Perhaps an ague fhook him when he appealed to the publick on this fubject; but the effects of a fever feem to predominate in his fubfequent letter to Monfieur D'Argenteuil on the fame occafion; for fuch a letter it is as our John Dennis (while his frenzy lafted) might be supposed to have written. "C'est moi qui autrefois parlai le mier de ce Shakspeare: c'eft moi qui le premier montrai aux François quelques perles quels j'avois trouvé dans fon enorme fumier.” Mrs. Montague, the juftly celebrated authorefs of the Essay on the genius and writings of our author, was in Paris, and in the circle where thefe ravings of the Frenchman were first publickly recited. On hearing the illiberal expreffion already quoted, with no less elegance than readinefs fhe replied-" C'est un fumier qui a fertilizé une terre bien ingrate."-In fhort, the author of Zayre, Mahomet, and Semiramis, poffeffes all the mischievous qualities of a midnight felon, who, in the hope to conceal his guilt, fets the house he has robbed on fire. As for Meffieurs D'Alembert and Marmontel, they might fafely be paffed over with that neglect which their impotence of criticifin deferves. Voltaire, in fpite of his natural difpofition to vilify an English poet, by adopting fentiments, characters, and fituations from Shakspeare, has bestowed on him involuntary praife. Happily, he has not been difgraced by the worthless encomiums or diffigured by the aukward imitations of the other pair, who "follow in the chace not like hounds that hunt, but like those who fill up the cry." When D'Alembert declares that more sterling sense is to be met with in ten French verfes than in thirty English ones, contempt is all that he provokes,-fuch contempt as can only be exceeded by that which every scholar will exprefs, who may chance to look into the profe tranflation of Lucan by Marmontel, with the vain expectation of discovering either the sense, the spirit or the whole of the original. STEEVENS. |