Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

The laft fection, containing miscellaneous remarks, confifts of fuch as our author thought not conveniently referable to the general heads of the former. Herein many paffages are adduced from Spenfer, and compared with others, either in the Greek or Latin claffics, or in former English writers, of which here he affirms, and there fuggefts, them to have been imitations. He afcribes fome of his author's particular expreffions to the manners of his time, or evinces their agreement and propriety to the notions and incidents of romance. He endeavours to fix the fignification of a few uncommon words (which he conceives to have been mistaken hitherto) by the authority of Chaucer and others; fhewing by what fubfequent writers fuch uncommon words have fince been used, and how their orthography has been varied: and of thefe remarks fome are lefs ingenious and neceffary than others. He gives us an inftance or two of fuch obvious tranfpofitions, as muft have fweetened fome of Spenser's rough lines, which introduce a critical digreffion on the harmonious pause and cadence of an alexandrine. Two or three examples of a bold and metathetical application of epithets are cited, and a few other licences of Spenfer in conftruction and fyntax; but fome of which, as him for himfelf, he obferves are the prefent language of poetry.

[ocr errors]

Our author's poftfcript is intended to extenuate fome objections, he modeftly fays, he is fenfible muft occur; and ⚫ particularly that of his being more diligent in pointing out the faults than the beauties of Spenfer. To this he rationally fays, that his having been deficient in encomiums ⚫ on particular paffages did not proceed from a want of perceiving or acknowledging beauties, but from a perfuafion that nothing is more abfurd or useless than the panegyrical comments of those who criticize from the imagination, rather than from the judgment; who exert their admira⚫tion instead of their reason, and discover more of enthufiafm than difcernment. And this muft, he adds, "be moft ⚫ commonly the cafe of those, who undertake to point out beauties, which, as they will naturally approve themselves to the reader by their own force, fo no reafon can often be given why they pleafe.' This is both juft and delicate, fuch beauties confifting probably of thofe nameless graces, which, Mr. Pope obferves-no precepts can declare. We may further add, that this method of infifting particularly on the blemishes of a great writer may prevent future imitators from copying them chiefly; which fome, who could never rife to their excellences, have made a fhift to attain to. And if the

much

much greater number of paffages, which fuch a critic paffes over without any ftricture, be fuppofed excellent, or irreprehenfible, there will be abundant room for the generous applause of those readers, whofe approbation beft honours a fine writer. Befides which, Mr. Warton's criticisms on the beauties of Spenfer would be the more fuperfluous, as he informs us, a formal edition of the Faerie Queene with notes is at prefent expected from two learned and ingenious critics, who, we hope, will exert the genuine functions of criticism, and, as Mr. Pope fays, teach the world with reason to 'admire.'

Upon the whole, Mr. Warton feems to have ftudied his author with much attention, and has obliged us with no bad prelude for the edition, of which he advises us. His acquaintance with our earliest writers must have qualified him. with fuch a relifh of the Anglo-Saxon dialect, as few poets, fince Prior, seem to have imbibed: and his claffical learning continually fupplies him with paffages from the antients, fimilar to his own author, and other English ones of a later date. For though his title-page profeffes to obferve on the Faerie Queene only, his great propenfity to ftarting of parallels often diverts him from his main purfuit, especially in the notes, which renders his criticism more mifcellaneous and excurfive, tho' not always the lefs entertaining. But we are concerned that the progrefs of this work obliges us to add, to what we have already mentioned in regard to Milton, that he seems particularly pointed at by our critic, as an imitator, tranflator and copyer, tho' an improving one; and this is conducted in fuch a manner, that the compliments now and then thrown in to mitigate and qualify such imputations, do not effectually conceal that partiality and ill-will, which a true critic should divest himself of; and which a genius of effential dignity is lefs generously fubjected to, when the man is dead. For tho' the envy of his cotemporaries might detract, his fame, which the candour of foreigners has reflected on his country, should not in prudence be curtailed by his countrymen. That he had great natural faculties, and that he read, imbibed and diffufed much, are equally manifeft: but a laboured inveftigation of his attainments, in detriment to his talents, has a malign afpect; and we apprehend the following inftances. will evince this point to have been over-ftrained by our author.

There is a paflage in Comus, quoted p. 250, which it is faid Milton probably copied from Euripides. Mr. Warton has fairly cited the Greek parallel. The circumftance they de

agree in, and that is, to defcribe two abfent youths, which are the lady's brothers in Comus, and fuppofed to be gods by the fhepherds in the Iphigenia in Tauris of Euripides; but it needs only impartiality and common tafte to discern, that the imagination and poetry of the Englishman greatly exceed the Grecian's on this occafion; and that it is more probable he did not think of Euripides here, than that he did. The fame may be affirmed of the parallelifm between Michael's foretelling the fate of paradife at the univerfal deluge, and the fpeech of Delos to Latona in Homer's hymn to Apollo; tho' the resemblance here is a little clofer. Some circumstances of the flood Milton is fuppofed to draw from the Noe Vaticinium of Cafimir. The great proof of this is that both have faid, in confequence of the flood, fea-monfters fhall lodge and litter in quondam palaces. What more natural coincidence than this on the very fame fubject? What image more likely to occur to both thefe fine writers? Mr. Addifon has the very fanie, we think, in his Latin ode to Dr. Burnet of the Charter-boufe. Miiton is honeftly admitted, p. 255, to be the first who gave, with becoming majefty, the idea of an armed angel; but from what fpirit proceeds the immediately fubfequent detraction from it? He probably received fome hints, in this refpect, from paintings which he had seen in Italy, particularly from one by Raphael, where Michael, clad in celeftial panoply, triumphs over Satan chained.' Now that Milton was in Italy before his blindnefs, is admitted; but it is neither a fair nor likely inference, that he could not have imagined this poetical figure without having feen Raphael's picture, as well as Raphael himself muft, before he painted it. It is only fuppofing the poet's imagination as ftrong as the painter's. Milton is thought, p. 297, to borrow the following line on his deceased wife,

Methought I faw my late deccafed faint,

from this in Sydney's vifion on the Faerie Queene,

Methought I faw the grave where Laura lay.

Niccols, an antient bard, called the cock daies harbinger--Milton terms the morning-ftar fo. Ergo! The former fays of May, that he throws from her lap the choiceft flowers; the latter, that the throws from her green lap the yellow cowflip. Now how could any competent poets, after making the month a perfonage, omit, with any propriety, annexing fuch a function to her! Milton is fuppofed to draw his very expreffion of blind fury in his Lycidas, from Spenser's fell Erinnys.

Erinnys. Even thefe trite words, this, this is fhe, in his Arcades, muft needs be copied from this is fhe, repeated in a mask of Johnson's. He is fuppofed, p. 306, to have committed another petty larceny, in ftealing honour due from Spenfor's bonour dew. What is this but interdicting a man common speech, and filencing him, on pain of plagiarism? Surely it is too mean and nugatory for candid mafculine criticifm; and perhaps we have been acting too trivially ourfelves, in reciting fo much of it. But to conclude, had our learned and ingenious author been more attentive to the essay on poetical imitation*, which he has fo juftly commended, and which exhibits fuch a clear and fatisfactory analysis of that delicate fubject, it must have faved him fome of thefe exceptionable ftriétures, and us the difagreeable occafion of mentioning them; as it is with regret we obferve ingenious writers afford any confiderable pretext for inferring them lefs ingenuous ones.

K

ART. XII. The doctrine of the trinity, as ufually explained, inconfiftent with feripture and reafon; and the pernicious confequences, that attend fuch misreprefentations of chriftianity, fet forth. In a letter to the author of the late vindication of the doctrine of the trinity, in two parts. 8vo. 1 s. 6 d. Shuckburgh.

TH

HE vindication, &c. to which the tract now before us is defigned as an anfwer, is generally allowed to be the most confiderable production which hath appeared against the effay on fpirit. Our impartial fentiments upon the propriety and confiftency of the scheme of doctrine it exhibits, and the conclufivenefs of the arguments alledged to fupport that scheme, were fubmitted to the judgment of the public, in the Review for Dec. 1753.

The author of the piece we are confidering, acquaints his readers that he engages in this debate, not from any apprehenfion that the author of the essay was unable to fupport his argument without the affiftance of others; but from a real conviction, that the cause he undertakes to defend is a common one, in which every private chriftian is concerned. Upon this account, he judges it expedient to reprefent, in the most unreserved manner, the reafons why he cannot acquiefce in the vindicator's account of this doctrine; and propofes to offer his objections in fuch a manner, as to give no juft caufe of offence to any candid and fincere inquirer atter truth, He * See Review for July 1753. p. 19, feq.

readily

readily allows, that in the prefent difpute, the weight of human authority lies on that fide of the queftion which he opposes; and that on this account the doctrine ought to be treated with decency, and oppofed with modefty; this respect he thinks is due to received and eftablifhed opinions. But he can by no means admit that because a doctrine hath the advantage of age and poffeffion, it hath any infallible mark of truth; or that time alone can render it fo facred, as that it should not be opposed or controverted at all. Such fentiments, he judges, can never be confiftently afferted by those who are perfuaded of the lawfulness of our reformation.

He obferves likewife, that the principles which the vindicator hath advanced, and which always have been advanced, and always muft, by those who enter into a full vindication of the Athanafian trinity, are in his apprehenfion, not only injurious to the Chriftian revelation, but deftructive of it; and would equally deftroy the pretenfions of any revelation whatfoever. But he is far from fupposing that the vindicator fees the confequences of his fyftem in the fame light that himself fees them. He doth not contend that mankind are chargeable with the confequences of all the opinions they hold; as this principle would introduce a wretched fcene of oppofition and animofity.

Having remarked from Mr. Jortin*, that the opinions of the Nicene fathers themselves upon this fubject did not come up to the standard of modern orthodoxy, he goes on, "wherefore fetting afide councils and fathers, by whose authority we shall never be able to fettle the point between us, let us proceed to fcripture and reafon; that is, to fcrip"ture understood and explained agreeably to the principles of 'genuine reason.-By the fcriptures I mean thofe of the new

teftament only, the old being in my apprehenfion of no fort of use in the prefent argument. Without doubt you ⚫ will expect some very good reason for this exclufion, fince poffibly this may be the first time you have met with it; and fuch I hope to give you. I do not find that any of these writers, who have attempted to prove the abfolute equality of the fon with the father from the old teftament, have really made it clear, that the Jews themfelves, I speak ⚫ of those who lived before our Saviour's time, ever collected this doctrine from their feriptures, or were poffeffed of any notion at all about it. Now this one circumstance • affords, I own, to me a strong prefumption against the Remarks on Ecclef. Hift. Vol. III. p. 95.

« AnteriorContinuar »