← Table of contents
Lectures on Poetry

CONCLUSION.

Reading edition

I have now gone through the several Particulars I propos'd to treat of in the Course of these Lectures: What I have too lightly touch'd upon, or entirely omitted, I leave to my Successors to discuss more fully, who will supply my Defects, and correct my Errors. Nothing now remains, but to return to you, Gentlemen, my heartiest Thanks, and to testify my sincerest Wishes for your Prosperity. I should quit this Office with more Regret, did I not consider, that, at any Time, to have receiv'd Marks of your Favour, will for ever remain to me those of Honour. Nothing is in my Power to return for them, but my most ardent Prayers for the Welfare of this University, that as it daily receives fresh Ornaments in Buildings, so it may make new Acquisitions (if there is Room for any) in Learning and Virtue, and in its Reputation for both; and that you may be as secure from the Attempts, as you are above the Reproaches of your Enemies. And, surely, unless we are much deceiv'd in our Hopes, and our Wishes biass us with too fond Credulity, we may esteem as fresh Omens of our Happiness, those numerous Towers that rise sacred to the Muses, even in the most difficult Times; insomuch, that if we retire from the University but a few Months, we are almost Strangers to it upon our Return, and verify the old Saying, tho' from a very different Reason, Oxonium quærimus in Oxonio, we seek for Oxford within her own Walls. It is amazing, then, that Men, who boast of the greatest Zeal for their Country, should hate and despise that which is the distinguishing Ornament of it. It would be blind Partiality in us, if, in other Respects, we pretended to excel the whole Earth. Brave, as we are, yet so are the French, so the Germans. Are we powerful by Sea, and rich in Commerce? the Dutch are also: And it would be the Height of Arrogance, to claim to ourselves the Laurels, in Point of Learning and Ingenuity. But that the English Universities are not to be parallel'd, is the Confession and Admiration of all the World: Even one of them, the less of the Two, I need not say equals, but exceeds all Foreign Ones together. This Glory is our peculiar Property, which yet some endeavour to extinguish, who would be thought strenuous Defenders of their Country. If you ask me the Reason for it, I know of none but what the old Saying in Terence supplies me with, Mala mens, malus animus, Bad Principles produce bad Designs. To such I wish true Repentance. As to myself, Words are too weak to express the Sentiments of my Heart for that Candour and Affection with which you have honour'd me with your Attendance, have pardon'd my Mistakes, and accepted my weak Endeavours. May the Oxford Muses flourish, for ever flourish, more and more; and may you, the Encouragers and Promoters of them, go on to promote them, and, by your Increase in Poetry, and all other Arts and Sciences, in Virtue and Learning, afford to Poets perpetual Subjects of Praise.

F I N I S.

Addenda & Corrigenda.

Page 15. l. 3. Vossius's Definition is short as it makes the Essence of Poetry consist solely in Imitation. Add this Note, The Author of Observations on Poetry occasioned by the late Poem on Leonidas, p. 71. finds the same Fault with Aristotle; who "by this, says he, excludes all descriptive Poetry; and accordingly he (Aristotle) directs the epic poet to introduce his characters, and write in dialogue, as much as possible, for this reason, that when the poet speaks himself, he is not an imitator. Plato has more justly distinguish'd, that some kinds of Poetry consist wholly in imitation, as tragedy and comedy; some in narration only, where the poet speaks in his own person, as odes; whereas some, as the epic, contain a mixture of both." For my Part, I cannot think it any great Violence put upon Words to allow that Description or Narration is Imitation. It is certain Aristotle uses the Word Imitation in this Sense, c. 3. και ναρ ιν τοιϛ αυ τοιϛ και αιτα μιμε αθ αι ισιν, οτι μεν απαγρελλο, η ἑτιρον τε γιγιομενσιϛ, A Poet may imitate the same Things either by Narration, or by assuming the Character of some other Person: And c. 22, 23. he distinguishes περι τηϛ οιτε ορθτειν μιμησιωϛ, and περι τηϛ δραγεαστικηϛ, between Dramatic Imitation, and Narrative: and c. 2. & 4. he mentions the Dithyrambics and Nomi, Hymns in Honour of Bacchus and Apollo, and other Odes, as Instances of Poetic Imitation. Now, I need not observe, that if in these Hymns and Odes, Actions, as Dacier contends, were imitated by Description or Narration, other Things may likewise. Nay Plato himself has omitted descriptive Poetry, as well as Aristotle if it is not included under narrative.

But still, if it is, the ingenious Author will not allow it to be Imitation, upon the Authority of Plato. Now as to Plato, Dan. Heinsius long since observed, that tho', with Dr. Pemberton, he sometimes speaks of Imitation as a Species of Poetry, yet at other times he agrees with Aristotle, in making it the Genus. In short, these two Philosophers are agreed, that All Poetry is Imitation; but Dramatic Imitation, or that which is supported by Dialogue, is more peculiarly so.

Next let us see if Dr. Pemberton's own Account of Poetry will not lead us to think Description to be Imitation. He observes, p. 75. That it is the peculiar Office of the Poet, in Opposition to the Prose-writer, to exhibit continually sensible Images of things. Now Images are surely Likenesses or Imitations; and whether these are the genuine Images of the Poet's Subject, or adventitious ones fetch'd in to illustrate it, still 'tis all Imagery: Imitation is his distinguishing Character. Again, p. 98. he observes, The language of comedy receives its poetic Air not by departing from the ordinary forms of speech, but by keeping more close to them. So that where we almost lose Sight of Poetry, the Traces of it are preserved by Imitation. Upon the whole 1. we see Plato and Aristotle use Imitation in a larger Sense than Dr. Pemberton was aware of; and 2. the Doctor naturally falls into the Sentiments of both, while he opposes one of them.

Vossius, it seems, and Dacier go farther, and suppose that Aristotle makes Poetry consist in the Imitation of Actions only. But the Words, c. 2. as Dr. Trapp observes, very well bear another Sense, ιπειδη μιμενται ον μιμουμενοι πορθονταϛ, &c. Since Imitators, or Poets imitate Actions, i.e. as well as other things; or possibly thus, joining ποθιτδοιδαϛ to μιμουμενοι, since those that imitate Actions are Imitators,—such Actions, he goes on, must be either good or bad.

As to Dacier, I cannot well make him consistent with himself: Aristotle, says he, c. 2. rem. 1. lays it down as an undoubted Principle, that All those that imitate, imitate Actions; and indeed it is so, for there is nothing else but Actions which can be imitated. And yet upon Aristotle's saying that Music is Imitation, he observes, that whatever employs means to shew and represent any Subject as naturally as may be, whether it Does Really Exist or no, is called Imitation. Does he by Actions above mean Effects? Aristotle, it must be own'd, instances in Actions as the Objects of Poetic Imitation, being to treat of Epic and Dramatic Poetry particularly. But he ascribes the Rise of Poetry in general to the Desire of Imitation, and the Pleasure we take in comparing the Likeness of Copies with their Originals. And this Faculty surely is exercised not only in viewing the Description of a Man, but of a Mountain; not only in representing the Conflicts of Passion, but

A painted Meadow and a purling Stream.

P. 154. l. 10, 11, r. thus

Tartuffe in English freely I resign; The Excrement is his, the Food was mine.

P. 303. l. 2. add this Note, I make no Doubt, but for ιπαγγελιαϛ the former being never used for Narration, the latter more than once by Aristotle, as c. 2. απαγγελιαϛ, and c. 6. ὁτε μεν απαγγελλοντα

P. 333. Note † change [thus] Bossu distinguishes very clearly, and to the same Purpose with Dr. Trapp, between the Narration the Poet himself makes, and that which he represents the Hero to make. In the former View, the Action of the Odyssee takes up Eight Years and six Months, and the Æneid almost seven Years. But in the latter, Bossu reduces the Odyssey to fifty eight Days; and the Æneis either to a Year and somewhat more, or else to a single Campaign, beginning where Dr. Trapp does. See Bossu Book II. ch. xviii. and Book III. c. xii.

Just Published.

Selectæ e profanis Scriptoribus Historiæ, quibus admista sunt varia honeste vivendi Præcepta, ex iisdem Scriptoribus deprompta. Editio altera.

Mons. Rollin, in his Method of Studying the Belles Lettres, Vol. I, p. 84, concludes a very advantageous Character of this Work in the following Words:

"I know of no Book, which may be more useful, and at the same time more agreeable to Youth. It contains excellent Principles of Morality, collected with great Order and Judgment, with very affecting Passages of History upon every Article."

FOOTNOTES:

Explore with AITake your curiosity a little further.

Reading settings