says,

menon which may be well enough explained from Cicero. He "" that in several families the Roman language was spoken in perfection, even in those times;" and instances particularly in the families of the Lælii and the Scipio's. Every one knows that Terence was extremely intimate in both these families: and as the language of his pieces is that of familiar conversation, he had indeed little more to do, than to write as they talked at their tables. Perhaps, too, he was obliged to Scipio and Lælius, for more than their bare conversations. That is not at all impossible; and indeed the Romans themselves seem generally to have imagined, that he was assisted by them in the writing part too. If it was really so, that will account still better for the elegance of the language in his plays: because Terence himself was born out of Italy; and though he was brought thither very young, he received the first part of his education in a family where they might not speak with so much correctness as Lælius and Scipio had been used to from their very infancy. Thus much for the language of Terence's plays: as for the rest, it seems, from what he says himself, that his most usual method was to take his plans chiefly, and his characters wholly, from the Greek comic poets. Those who say that he translated all the comedies of Menander, certainly carry the matter too far. They were probably more than Terence ever wrote. In deed this would be more likely to be true of Afranius than Terence; though I suppose, it would scarce hold were we to take both of them together. Spence.

44. Of PACUVIUS and ACTIUS.

About the same time that comedy was improved so considerably, Pacuvius and Actius (one a contemporary of Terence. and the other of Afranius) carried tragedy as far towards perfection as it ever arrived in Roman hands. The step from Ennius to Pacuvius was a very great one; so great, that he was reckoned, in Cicero's time, the best of all their tragic poets. Pacuvius, as well as Terence, enjoyed the acquaintance and friendship of Lælius and Scipio: but he did not profit so much by it, as to the improvement of his language. Indeed his style was not to be the common conversation style, as Terence's was; and all the stiffenings given to it, might take just as much from its elegance, as they added to its dignity. What is remarkable in him, is that he was almost as eminent for painting as he was for poetry. He made the decorations for his own plays; and Pliny speaks of some paintings by him, in a temple of Hercules, as the most celebrated work of their kind, done by any Roman of condition after Fabius Pictor. Actius began to publish when Pacuvius was leaving off: his language was not so fine, nor his verses so well turned, even as those of his predecessor. There is a remarkable story of him in an old critic, which, as it may give some light into their different manners of writing, may be worth relating. Pacuvius, in his old age, retired to Tarentum, to enjoy the soft air and mild winters of that place. As Actius was obliged, on some affairs, to make a joatacy into Asia, he took Tarentum in his way, and staid there some days with Pacuvius. It was in his visit that he read his tragedy of Atreus to him, and desired his opinion of it. Old Pacuvius, after hearing it out, told him very honestly, that the poetry was sonorous and majestic, but that it seemed to him too stiff and harsh. Acties replied, that he was himself very sensible of that fault in his writings; but that he was not at all sorry for it: for," says he, Afranius stories and persons were Roman, as Terence's were Grecian. This the same with writers as with fruits; 2"I have always been of opinion, that it is was looked upon as so material a point in mong which those that are most soft and those days, that it made two different spe- palatable, decay the soonest; whereas cies of comedy. Those on a Greek story those of a rough taste last the longer, and were called, Palliatæ: and those on a Ro- have the finer relish, when once they come Terence excelled all the to be mellowed by time."-Whether this Roman pocts in the former, and Afranius style ever come to be thus mellowed, I very much doubt; however that was, it is a

43. Of AFRANIUS.

We have a very great loss in the works of Afranius: for he was regarded, even in the Augustan age, as the most exact imitator of Menander. He owns himself, that he had no restraint in copying him; or any other of the Greek comic writers,, wherever they set him a good example.

man, Togatæ.

in the latter.

Ibid.

point

$45. Of the Rise of Salire: Of LUCILIUS, LUCRETIUS, and CATULLUS,

All this while, that is, for above one hundred years, the stage, as you see, was almost solely in possession of the Roman poets. It was now time for the other kinds of poetry to have their turn; however, the first that sprung up and flourished to any degree, was still a scyon from the same root. What I mean, is Satire; the produce of the old comedy. This kind of poetry had been attempted in a different manner by some of the former writers, and in particular by Ennius: but it was so altered and so improved by Lucilius, that he was called the inventor of it. This was a kind of poetry wholly of the Roman growth; and the only one they had that was so; and even as to this, Lucilius improved a good deal by the side lights he borrowed from the old comedy at Athens. Not long after, Lucretius brought their poetry acquainted with philosophy: and Catullus began to shew the Romans something of the excellence of the Greek lyric poets. Lucretius discovers a great deal of spirit wherever his subject will give him leave; and the first moment he steps a little aside from it, in all his digressions he is fuller of life and fire, and appears to have been of a more poetical turn, than Virgil himself; which is partly acknowledged in the fine compliment the latters scems to pay him in his Georgics. His subject of ten obliges him to go on heavily for an hundred lines together; but wherever he breaks out, he breaks out like lightning from a dark cloud; all at once, with force and brightness. His character in this agrees with what is said of him: that a philtre he took had given him a frenzy, and that he wrote in his lucid intervals. He and Catullus wrote, when letters in general began to flourish at Rome much more than ever they had done, Catullus was too wise to rival him; and was the most admired of all his cotemporaries, in all the different ways of writing he attempted. His odes perhaps are the least valuable part of his works. The strokes of satire in his epigrams are very severe; and the descriptions in his Idylliums, very full and picturesque. He paints strongly; but all his paintings have more of force

than elegance, and put one more in mind of Homer than Virgil.

:

With these I shall chuse to close the first age of the Roman poetry: an age more remarkable for strength than for refinement in writing. I have dwelt longer on it perhaps than I ought; but the order and succession of these poets wanted much to be settled and I was obliged to say something of each of them, because I may have recourse to each on some occasion or another, in shewing you my collection. All that remains to us of the poetical works of this age, are the miscellaneous poems of Catullus; the philosophical poem of Lucretius; six comedies by Terence; and twenty by Plautus. Of all the rest, there is nothing left us, except such passages from their works as happened to be quoted by the ancient writers, and particularly by Cicero and the old critics.

Ibid.

46. Of the Criticisms of CICERO, HoRACE, and QUINCTILIAN on the above Wrilers.

The best way to settle the characters and merits of these poets of the first agé, where so little of their own works remains, is by considering what is said of them by the other Roman writers, who were well acquainted with their works. The best of the Roman critics we can comsult now, and perhaps the best they ever had, are Cicero, Horace, and Quinctiliau. If we compare their sentiments of these poets together, we shall find a disagreement in them; but a disagreement which I think may be accounted for, without any great 'difficulty. Cicero, (as he lived before the Roman Poetry was brought to perfection, and possibly as no very good judge of poetry himself) seems to think more highly of them than the others. He gives up Livius indeed; but then he makes it up in commending Nævius. All the other comic poets he quotes often with respect; and as to the tragic, he carries it so far as to seem strongly inclined to oppose old Ennius to

chilus, Pacuvius to Sophocles, and Actius to Euripides.-This high notion of the old poets was probably the general fashion in his time; and it continued afterwards (especially among the more elderly sort of people) in the Augustan age; and indeed much longer. Horace, in his epistic to Augustus, combats it as a vulgar error in his time; and perhaps it was an er from which that prince himself was r

Dd4

wholy

:

wholly free. However that be, Horace,,
on this occasion, enters into the question
very fally, and with a good deal of warmth.
The character he gives of the old drama-
tic poets (which indeed includes all the
Poets I have been speaking of, except Lu-
cilius, Lucretius, and Catullus), is perhaps
rather too severc.
He says,
"That their
language was in a great degree superan-
nuated, even in his time; that they are
often negligent and incorrect; and that
there is generally a stiffness in their com-
positions that people indeed might par-
don these things in thein, as the fault of
the times they lived in; but that it was
provoking they should think of commend-
ing them for those very faults." In ano-
ther piece of his, which turns pretty much
on the same subject, he gives Lucilius's
character much in the same manner. He
owns, "that he had a good deal of wit;
but then it is rather of the farce kind,
than true genteel wit. He is a rapid
writer, and has a great many good things
in him; but is often very superfluous and
incorrect; his language is dashed affectedly
with Greek; and his verses are hard and
unharmonious."-Quinctilian steers the
middle way between both. Cicero per-
haps was a little misled by his nearness to
their times; and Horace by his subject,
which was professedly to speak against the
old writers. Quinctilian, therefore, does
not commend them so generally as Cicero,
nor speak against them so strongly as Ho-
race; and is perhaps more to be depended
upon, in this case, than either of them.
He compares the works of Ennius to some
sacred grove, in which the old oaks look
rather venerable than pleasing. He com-
mends Pacuvius and Actius, for the
strength of their language and the force of
their sentiments; but says, "they wanted
that polish which was set on the Roman
poetry alterwards." He speaks of Plautus
and Caecilius, as applauded writers: of
Terence, as a most elegant, and of Afra-
nius, as an excellent one; but they all,
says he, fall infinitely short of the grace
and beauty which is to be found in the
Anic writers of comedy, and which is
perhaps peculiar to the dialect they wrote
in. To conclude: According to him,
Lucilius is too much cried up by many,
and too much run down by Horace; Lu-
cretius is more to be read for his matter
than for his style; and Catullus is remark-
able in the satirical part of his works, but
scarce so in the rest of his lyric poetry.

Spence.

$47. Of the flourishing State of Poetry among the ROMANS.

The first age was only as the dawning of the Roman poetry, in comparison of the clear full light that opened all at once afterwards, under Augustus Cæsar. The state which had been so long tending towards a monarchy, was quite settled down to that form by this prince. When he had no longer any dangerous opponents, he grew mild, or at least concealed the cruelty of his temper. He gave peace and quiet to the people that were fallen into his hands; and looked kindly on the improvement of all the arts and elegancies of life among them. He had a minister, too, under him, who (though a very bad writer himself) knew how to encourage the best;, and who admitted the best poets, in particular, into a very great share of friendship and intimacy with him. Virgil was one of the foremost in his list; who, at his first setting out, grew soon their most applauded writer for genteel pastorals; then gave them the most beautiful and most correct poem that ever was wrote in the Roman language, in his rules of agriculture (so beautiful, that some of the ancients seem to accuse Virgil of having studied beauty too much in that piece); and last of all, undertook a political poem, in support of the new establishment. I have thought this to be the intent of the Eneid, ever since I first read Bossu; and the more one considers it, the more I think one is confirmed in that opinion, Virgil is said to have begun this poem the very year that Augustus was freed from his great rival Anthony: the government of the Roman empire was to be wholly in him: and though he chose to be called their father, he was, in every thing but the name, their king. This monarchical form of government must naturally be apt to displease the people. Virgil seems to have laid the plan of his poem to reconcile them to it. He takes advantage of their religious turn; and of some old prophecies that must have been very flattering to the Roman people, as promising them the empire of the whole world: he weaves this in with the most probable account of their origin, that of their being descended from the Trojans. To be a little more parti cular: Virgil, in his Eneid, shews that

neas was called into their country by the express order of the gods; that he was made a king of it, by the will of heaven,

and

other epic poems among the Romans, as Homer's is among the Greeks.

the Author's Genius.

Spence.

and by all the human rights that could be; that there was an uninterrupted succession of kings from him to Romulus; that his heirs were to reign there for ever; and that the Romans, under them, were to obtain 48. Observations on the ENEID, and the monarchy of the world. It appears from Virgil, and the other Roman writers, that Julius Cæsar was of the royal race, and that Augustus was his sole heir. The natural result of all this is, that the promises made to the Roman people, in and through this race, terminating in Augustus, the Romans, if they would obey the gods, and be masters of the world, were to yield obedience to the new establishment under that prince. As odd a scheme as this may seem now, it is scarce so odd as that of some people among us, who persuaded themselves, that an absolute obedience was owing to our kings, on their supposed descent from some unknown patriarch: and yet that had its effects with many, about a century ago; and seems not to have quite lost all its influence, even in our remembrance. However that be, I think it appears plain enough, that the two great points aimed at by Virgil in his Æneid, were to maintain their old religious tenets, and to support the new form of government in the family of the Caesars. That poem therefore may very well be considered as a religious and political work, or rather (as the vulgar religion with them was scarce any thing more than an engine of state) it may fairly enough be considered as a work merely political. If this was the case, Virgil was not so highly encouraged by Augustus and Mæcenas for nothing. To speak a little more plainly He wrote in the service of the new usurpation on the state: and all that can be offered in vindication of him, in this light, is, that the usurper he wrote for, was grown a tame one; and that the temper and bent of their constitution, at that time, was such, that the reins of government must have fallen into the hands of some one person or another; and might probably, on any new revolution, have fallen into the hands of some one less mild and indulgent than Augustus was, at the time when Virgil wrote this poem in his service. But whatever may be said of his reasons for writing it, the poem itself has been highly applauded in all ages, from its first appearance to this day; and though left unfinished by its author, has been always reckoned as much superior to all the

It preserves more to us of the religion of the Romans, than all the other Latin poets (excepting only Ovid) put together: and gives us the forms and appearances of their deities, as strongly as if we had so many pictures of them preserved to us, done by some of the best hands in the Augustan age. It is remarkable that he is commended by some of the ancients themselves, for the strength of his imagination as to this particular, though in general that is not his character, so much as exactness. He was certainly the most correct poet even of his time; in which all false thoughts and idle ornaments in writing were discouraged: and it is as certain, that there is but little of invention in his Eneid; much less, I believe, than is generally imagined. Almost all the little facts in it are built on history; and even as to the particular lines, no one perhaps ever borrowed more from the poets that preceded him, than he did. He goes so far back as to old Ennius: and oftenrinserts whole verses from him, and some other of their earliest writers. The obsoleteness of their style, did not hinder him much in this: for he was a particular lover of their old language; and no doubt inserted many more antiquated words in his poem: than we can discover at present. Judment is his distinguishing character; and his great excellence consisted in chusing and ranging things aright. Whatever he borrowed, he had the skill of making his own, by weaving it so well into his work, that it looks all of a piece; even those parts of his poems, where this may be most practised, resembling a fine piece of Mosaic, in which all the parts, though of such different marbles, unite together; and the various shades and colours are so artfully disposed as to melt off insensibly into one another.

One of the greatest beauties in Virgil's private character was, his modesty and good nature. He was apt to think humbly of himself, and handsomely of others: and was ready to shew his love of merit, even where it might seem to clash with his own. He was the first who reconmended Horace to Mæcenas.

Ibid.