can write this but himself; and no man, I am sure, can sing it so affectingly. But what this canticle should be, either in his or the other candidate's case, I shall not pretend to determine. Thirdly, there ought to be a public show, or entry of the poet; to settle the order or procession of which, Mr. Anstis and Mr. Dennis ought to have a conference. I apprehend here two difficulties: one, of procuring an elephant; the other, of teaching the poet to ride him. Therefore I should imagine the next animal in size or dignity would do best; either a mule or a large ass; particularly if that noble one could be had, whose portraiture makes so great an ornament of the Dunciad, and which (unless I am misinformed) is yet in the park of a nobleman near this city:unless Mr. Cibber be the man; who may, with great propriety and beauty, ride on a dragon, if he goes by land; or if he choose the water, upon one of his own swans from Cæsar in Egypt. We have spoken sufficiently of the ceremony; let us now speak of the qualifications and privileges of the Laureate. First, we see he must be able to make verses extempore, and to pour forth innumerable, if required. In this I doubt Mr. Tibbald. Secondly, he ought to sing, and intrepidly, patulo ore: here, I confess the excellency of Mr. Cibber. Thirdly, he ought to carry a lyre about with him. If a large one be thought too cumbersome, a small one may be contrived to hang about the neck, like an order, and be very much a grace to the person. Fourthly, he ought to have a good stomach, to eat and drink whatever his betters think fit; and therefore it is in this high office as in many others, no puny constitution can discharge it. I do not think Cibber or Tibbald here so happy: but rather a stanch vigorous, seasoned, and dry old gentleman, whom I have in my eye. I could also wish at this juncture, such a person as is truly jealous of the honour and dignity of poetry; no joker, or trifler, but a bard in good earnest; nay, not amiss if a critic, and the better if a little obstinate. For when we consider what great privileges have been lost from this office (as we see from the forecited authentic record of Jovius), namely, those of feeding from the prince's table, drinking out of his own flagon, becoming even his domestic and companion; it requires a man warm and resolute, to be able to claim and obtain the restoring of these high honours. I have cause to fear the most of the candidates would be liable, either through the influence of ministers, or for rewards or favours, to give up the glorious rights of the Laureate. Yet I am not without hopes, there is one, from whom a serious and steady assertion of these privileges may be expected; and, if there be such a one, I must do him the justice to say, it is Mr. Dennis, the worthy president of our society. PARALLEL OF THE CHARACTERS OF MR. DRYDEN AND MR. POPE, AS DRAWN BY CERTAIN OF THEIR CONTEMPORARIES. MR. DRYDEN, HIS POLITICS, RELIGION, MORALS. MR. DRYDEN is a mere renegado from monarchy, poetry, and good sense.1 A true republican son of monarchical church. A republican atheist.3 Dryden was from the beginning an αλλοπροσαλλος, and I doubt not will continue so to the last.* In the poem called Absalom and Achitophel, are notoriously traduced the King, the Queen, the Lords, and Gentlemen; not only their honorable persons exposed, but the whole nation and its representatives notoriously libelled. It is scandalum magnatum, yea, of Majesty itself.5 He looks upon God's gospel as a foolish fable, like the Pope, to whom he is a pitiful purveyor. His very Christianity may be questioned." He ought to expect more severity than other men, as he is most unmerciful in his reflections on others. 1 Milbourn on Dryden's Virgil, 8vo. 5 Whip and Key, 6 Ibid. 1698, p. 6. 4 Ib. p. 8. Janeway, 1682. pref. 8 Ib. p. 175. 239 PARALLEL OF THE CHARACTERS OF MR. POPE AND MR. DRYDEN, AS DRAWN BY CERTAIN OF THEIR CONTEMPORARIES. MR. POPE, HIS POLITICS, RELIGION, MORALS. MR. POPE is an open and mortal enemy to his country, and the commonwealth of learning.1 Some call him a Popish Whig, which is directly inconsistent.2 Pope, as a Papist, must be a Tory and High-flier. He is both a Whig and Tory.* He hath made it his custom to cackle to more than one party in their own sentiments.5 In his Miscellanies, the persons abused are the King, the Queen, his late Majesty, both Houses of Parliament, the Privy Council, the Bench of Bishops, the established Church, the present Ministry, &c. To make sense of some passages, they must be construed into royal scandal. He is a Popish rhymester, bred up with a contempt of the Sacred Writings. His religion allows him to destroy heretics, not only with his 1 Dennis, Rem. on the Rape of the Lock, pref. p. 12. 2 Dunciad Dissected. 8 Pref. to Gulliveriana. 4 Dennis, Character of Mr. P. 5 Theobald, Letter in Mist's Journal, June 22, 1728. 6 List at the end of a Collection of Verses, Letters, Advertisements, 8vo. printed for A. Moore, 1728, and the preface to it, p. 6. Dennis's Remarks on Homer, p. 27. With as good a right as his Holiness, he sets up for poetical infallibility.9 MR. DRYDEN ONLY A VERSIFIER. His whole libel is all bad matter, beautified (which is all that can be said of it) with good metre.10 Mr. Dryden's genius did not appear in any thing more than his versification, and whether he is to be ennobled for that only is a question." MR. DRYDEN'S VIRGIL. 12 Tonson calls it Dryden's Virgil, to show that this is not that Virgil so admired in the Augustan age, but a Virgil of another stamp, a silly, impertinent, nonsensical writer.1 None but a Bavius, a Mævius, or a Bathyllus, carped at Virgil; and none but such unthinking vermin admire his translator.18 It is true, soft and easy lines might become Ovid's Epistles or Art of Love-but Virgil, who is all great and majestic, &c. requires strength of lines, weight of words, and closeness of expression; not an ambling muse, running on carpet ground, and shod as lightly as a Newmarket racer.-He has numberless faults in his author's meaning, and in propriety of expression.14 9 Milbourn, p. 39. 10 Whip and Key, pref. 11 Oldmixon, Essay on Criticism, p. 84. 12 Milbourn, p. 2. 14 Ib. p. 22, and 102. 18 Ib. p. 35. |