Slike strani
PDF
ePub

noble hands. Besides this Tale, there is another, of his own invention, after the manner of the Provençals, called THE FLOWER AND THE LEAF,"

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Chaucer, which, Mr. Warton observes, exhibits the first conspicuous example of the heroick couplet in our language, we are surprized to find numbers so nervous and flowing; a circumstance which greatly contributed to ren der Dryden's paraphrase of it one of the most animated and harmonious pieces of versification in the English language. "Chaucer has eminently shewn his good sense and judgment in rejecting the superfluities, and improving the general arrangement of the story. He frequently corrects or softens Boccacio's false manners ;' and it is with singular address he has often abridged the Italian poet's ostentatious and pedantick parade of ancient history and mythology." HIST. OF E. P. i. 367, and vol. ii. EMENDATIONS, &c. Sign. e. 2.

Mr. Tyrwhitt, after having shewn that the received notion of Chaucer's having been a follower of Alain Chartier, is erroneous, adds-" I will just take notice of another opinion, (which has been propagated upon as little foundation,) that Chaucer imitated the Provençal poets. Mr. Rymer, who, I believe, first made the discovery, speaks only of his having borrowed from their language [View of Trag. p. 78], but Mr. Dryden found out, that he copied after their manner; particularly his Tale of THE FLOWER AND THE LEAF. [Pref. to Fables.] Mr. Warton also thinks that THE HOUSE Of Fame ' was originally a Provencial composition.' [Hist. of Eng. Po. vol. i. p. 389. 458.]

How far Chaucer's language was borrowed, has been considered already, in the ESSAY, &c. Part i. I will only add here, that I have not observed in any of his writings a single phrase or word, which has the least appearance of having been fetched by him from the South

with which I was so particularly pleased, both for the invention and the moral, that I cannot hinder myself from recommending it to the reader.

of the Loire. With respect to the manner and matter of his compositions, till some clear instance of imitation be produced, I shall be slow to believe that in either he ever copied the poets of Provence, with whose works, I apprehend, he had very little, if any, acquaintance.' C. T. Append. Pref. p. xxxv.

Mr. Warton, in the EMENDATIONS and ADDITIONS subjoined to his second volume (published in 1778,) after acknowledging that he had "advanced a contrary doctrine, at least by implication," thus qualifies his former assertion." I here beg leave to explain myself on a subject materially affecting the system of criticism that has been formed on Chaucer's works. I have never affirmed, that Chaucer imitated the Provencial bards; although it is by no means improbable that he might have known their tales. But as the peculiar nature of the Provencial poetry entered deeply into the substance, cast, and character, of some of those French and Italian models which he is allowed to have followed, he certainly may be said to have copied, although not immediately, the matter and manner of these writers. I have called his HOUSE OF FAME originally a Provencial composition. I did not mean that it was written by a Provencial troubadour; but that Chaucer's original was compounded of the capricious mode of fabling, and that extravagant style of fiction, which constitute the essence of the Provencial poetry. As to THE FLOURE AND THE LEAFE, which Dryden pronounces to have been composed after their manner, it is framed on the old allegorizing spirit of the Provencial writers, refined and disfigured by the fopperies of the French poets in the fourteenth century. The ideas of these fablers had been so strongly imbibed, that

}

As a corollary to this Preface, in which I have done justice to others, I owe somewhat to myself; not that I think it worth my time to enter the lists with one Milbourne, or one Blackmore, but barely to take notice, that such men there are, who have written scurrilously against me without any provocation. Milbourne, who is in orders, pretends amongst the rest this quarrel to me, that I have fallen foul on priesthood: if I have, I am only to ask pardon of good priests, and am afraid his part of the reparation will come to little. Let him be satisfied that he shall not be able to force himself upon me for an adversary. I contemn him too much to enter into competition with him. His own translations of Virgil have answered his criticisms on mine. If (as they say, he has declared in print,) he prefers the version of Ogilby to mine, the world has made him the same compliment; for it is agreed on all hands, that he writes even below Ogilby. That, you will say, is not easily to be done; but what cannot Milbourne bring about? I am satisfied, however, that while he and I live together, I shall not be thought the

they continued to operate long after Petrarch had introduced a more rational method of composition."

In the original copy we find here, only one M. and one B.; which was implicitly copied in most of the subsequent editions. By whatever motives of delicacy the suppression of these gentlemen's names originally may have been dictated, it is now certainly unnecessary.

[blocks in formation]

worst poet of the age. It looks as if I had desired him underhand to write so ill against me; but upon my honest word I have not bribed him to do me this service, and am wholly guiltless of his pamphlet. It is true, I should be glad if I could persuade him to continue his good offices, and write such another critique on any thing of mine; for I find by experience he has a great stroke with the reader, when he condemns any of my poems, to make the world have a better opinion of them. He has taken some pains with my poetry; but no body will be persuaded to take the same with his. If I had taken to the church, (as he affirms, but which was never in my thoughts,) I should have had more sense, if not more grace, than to have turned myself out of my benefice by writing libels on my parishioners. But his account of my manners and my principles, are of a piece with his cavils and his poetry: and so I have done with him for ever.

8

As for the City Bard, or Knight Physician, I hear his quarrel to me is, that I was the author of ABSALOM AND ACHITOPHEL, which he thinks is a little hard on his fanatick patrons in London.

But I will deal the more civilly with his two Poems, because nothing ill is to be spoken of the dead; and therefore peace be to the manes of his

8 This seems to allude to some event in the life of Milbourne, the particulars of which I have not been able to recover. He was beneficed, I believe, at Yarmouth, in Norfolk.

[blocks in formation]

ARTHURS." I will only say that it was not for this noble Knight that I drew the plan of an epick poem on King Arthur, in my Preface to the translation of Juvenal. The guardian angels of kingdoms were machines too ponderous for him to manage; and therefore he rejected them, as Dares did the whirlbats of Eryx, when they were thrown before him by Entellus :' yet from that Preface he plainly took his hint; for he began immediately upon the story, though he had the baseness not to acknowledge his benefactor, but, instead of it, to traduce me in a libel.*

9 Blackmore's PRINCE ARTHUR, an heroick poem in ten books, (strange to tell) passed through two editions in folio, in 1695; and a third was printed not long afterwards. KING ARTHUR, an heroick poem in twelve books, made its appearance in folio, in 1697. This indefatigable maker of verses produced afterwards two other epick poems, entitled ALFRED, and ELIZA; and CREATION, a philosophical poem, in seven books. It is a singular circumstance, as Dr. Johnson has observed, that Blackmore's first work was an heroick poem.

1 Æn. v. 406.

2 This libel, Dr. Johnson thought, was Blackmore's SATIRE AGAINST WIT, published in 1700; in which he has severely censured the impurities of Dryden's plays. But I doubt whether that Satire preceded the publication of the FABLES, which, I believe, were issued from the press early in February 1699-1700.-If they preceded Blackmore's poem, the following passage of the Preface to PRINCE ARTHUR, in which our author is evidently pointed at, must have been the libel here alluded to:

Some of these Poets, to excuse their guilt, alledge for themselves, that the degeneracy of the age makes their

« PrejšnjaNaprej »