had been applauded so much for the difficulty of doing it even in profe; knowing how this, well executed, must extremely transcend the other.

But as great Poets are a little apt to think they have an ancient right of being excus'd for vanity on all occafions, he was not content to out-do M. D'Acier, but endeavour'd to out-do Homer himself, and all that ever in any age or nation went before him in the fame enterprize; by leaving out, altering, or adding whatever he thought beft.

Against this prefumptuous attempt, Homer has been in all times fo well defended, as not to need my small affiftance; yet I muft needs fay, his excellencies are fuch, that for their fakes he deferves a much gentler touch for his feeming errors. Thefe, if M. de la Motte had tranflated as well as the reft, with an apology for having retained them only out of mere veneration; his judgment, in my opinion, would have appear'd much greater than by the best of his alterations, though I admit them to be written very finely. I join with M. de la Motte in wondering at fome odd things in Homer, but 'tis chiefly be cause of his fublime ones, I was about to say his divine ones, which almost furprize me at finding him any where in the fallible condition of human nature,

And now we are wondering, I am in a difficulty to guess what can be the reafon of thefe exceptions against Homer, from one who has himself tranflated him, contrary to the general cuftom of tranflators. Is there not a little of that in it? I mean to be fingular, in getting above the title of a Tranflator, tho' fufficiently honourable in this cafe. For fuch an ambition no body has lefs occafion, than one who is fo fine a Poet in other kinds; and who must have too much wit to believe, any alteration of another can entitle him to the denomination of an Epic Poet himself: tho' no man in this age feems more capable of being a good one, if the French tongue would bear it. Yet in his tranflation he has done too well, to leave any doubt (with all his faults) that her's can be ever parallel'd with it.

Befides,

Befides, he could not be ignorant, that finding faults is the most easy and vulgar part of a critic; whereas nothing fhews fo much skill and taste both, as the being thoroughly fenfible of the fublimeft excellencies.

What can we fay in excuse of all this? Humanum est errare: fince as good a Poet as, I believe, the French language is capable of, and as fharp a Critic as any nation can produce, has, by too much censuring Homer, subjected a tranflation to cenfure, that would have otherwife ftood the teft of the fevereft adverfary.

But fince he would needs chufe that wrong way of criticifm, I wonder he mifs'd a ftone fo eafy to be thrown against Homer, not for his filling the Iliad with so much flaughter (for that is to be excufed, fincé à War is not capable of being described without it) but with so many various particulars of wounds and horror, as fhew the writer (I am afraid) fo delighted that way himself, as not the least to doubt his reader being fo alfo. Like Spanioletta, whofe difmal pictures are the more difagreeable for being always fo movingly painted. Even Hector's last parting from his fon and Andromache hardly makes us amends for his body's being dragg'd thrice round the town. M. de la Motte, in his ftrongeft objections about that difmal combat, has fufficient caufe to blame his inraged adverfary; Who here gives an inftance, that it is impoffible to be vio lent without committing fomne mistake; her paffion for Homer blinding her too much to perceive the very groffeft of his failings by which warning I am become a little more capable of impartiality, though in à difpute about that very Poet for whom I have the greateft veneration.

M, D'Acier might have confider'd a little, that whatever were the motives of M. de la Motte to fo bold a proceeding, it could not darken that fame which I am fure the thinks fhines fecurely, even after the vain attempts of Plato himself against it: caus'd only perhaps by a like reafon with that of Madam D'Acier's anger against M. de lá Motté, namely, the finding that în profe his genius (great as it was) could not be capable

of

of the fublime heights of poetry, which therefore he banifhed out of his commonwealth.

Nor were thefe objections to Homer any more leffening of her merit in tranflating him as well as that way is capable of, viz. fully, plainly, and elegantly, than the moft admirable verfes can be any difparagement to as excellent profe.

The best excufe for all this violence is, its being in a caufe which gives a kind of reputation even to fuffering, notwithstanding ever fo ill a management of it.

The worft of defending even Homer in such a paffionate manner, is its being more a proof of her weaknefs, than of his being liable to none. For what is it can excufe Homer any more than Hector, for flying at the first sight of Achilles? whofe terrible afpect fure needed not fuch an inexcufable fright to set it off; and methinks all that account of Minerva's restoring his dart to Achilles, comes a little too late, for excufing Hector's fo terrible apprehenfion at the very firft.

LETTER XIII.

To the Duke of BUCKINGHAM.

Sept. 1, 1718.

I

Am much honour'd by your Grace's compliance with my request, in giving me your opinion of the French difpute concerning Homer. And I fhall keep my word, in fairly telling wherein I disagree from you. It is but in two or three very fmall points, not fo much of the dif pute, as of the parties concern'd in it. I cannot think quite fo highly of the Lady's learning, tho' I refpect it very much. It is great complaifance in that polite na tion, to allow her to be a Critic of equal rank with her husband. To inftance no further, his remarks on Horace fhew more good Senfe, Penetration, and a better Tafte of his author, and those upon Ariftotle's Art of

Poetry

Poetry more Skill and Science, than any of her's on any author whatever *. In truth, they are much more flight, dwell more in generals, and are befides, for the most part, lefs her own; of which her Remarks upon Homer are an example, where Euftathius is transcribed ten times for once that he is quoted. Nor is there at all more depth of learning in thofe upon Terence, Plautus, or (where they were most wanted) upon Ariftophanes, only the Greek scholia upon the latter are fome of the beft extant.

Your Grace will believe me, that I did not search to find defects in a Lady; my employment upon the Iliad. forced me to fee them; yet I have had fo much of the French complaifance as to conceal her thefts; for whereever I have found her notes to be wholly another's (which is the cafe in fome hundreds) I have barely quoted the true Proprietor, without obferving upon it. If Madam D'Acier has ever seen my observations, she will be fenfible of this conduct; but what effect it may have upon a Lady, I will not answer for.

In the next place, as to M. de la Motte, I think your Grace hardly does him right, in fuppofing he could have no idea of the beauties of Homer's Epic Poetry, but what he learn'd from Madam D'Acier's Profe-tranflation. There had been a very elegant Profe-tranflation before, that of Monfieur de la Valterie; fo elegant, that the ftyle of it was evidently the original and model of the famous Telemaque. Your Grace very juftly animadverts against the too great difpofition of finding faults in the one, and of confeffing none in the other. But doubtless, as to Violence, the Lady has infinitely the better of the Gentleman. Nothing can be more polite, difpaffionate, or fenfible, than M. de la Motte's manner of managing the difpute and fo much as I fee your Grace admires the beauty of his verse (in which you have the fuffrage too of the Archbishop of Cambray) I will venture to fay, his profe is full as good. I think therefore when you fay, no difputants even in Divinity could be more outrageous

This is a juft Character of that excellent Critic's writings.

and

and uncharitable than these two authors, you are a little too hard upon M. de la Motte. Not but that (with your Grace) I doubt as little of the zeal of Commentators as of the zeal of Divines, and am as ready to believe of the paffions and pride of mankind in general, that (did but the fame interefts go along with them) they would carry the learned world to as violent extremes, animofities, and even perfecutions, about variety of opinions in Criticism, as ever they did about Religion: and that, in defect of Scripture to quarrel upon, we should have French, Italian, and Dutch Commentators ready to burn one another about Homer, Virgil, Terence, and Horace.

I do not wonder your Grace is fhock'd at the flight of Hector upon the firft appearance of Achilles, in the twenty-fecond Iliad. However (to fhew myself a true Commentator, if not a true Critic) I will endeavour to excufe, if not to defend it, in my Notes on that book. And to fave myself what trouble I can, instead of doing it in this letter, I will draw up the fubftance of what I have to fay for it in a separate paper, which I'll shew your Grace when next we meet. I will only defire you to allow me, that Hector was in an abfolute certainty of death, and deprefs'd over and above with the confcience of being in an ill caufe. If your heart be fo great, as not to grant the first of these will fink the fpirit of a Hero, you'll at leaft be fo good as to allow the fecond may. But, I can tell your Grace, no lefs a Hero than my Lord 'Peterborow, when a perfon complimented him for never being afraid, made this anfwer; "Sir, fhew me a dan"ger that I think an imminent and real one, and I promife you I'll be as much afraid as any of you." I am your Grace's, &c.

VOL. IV.

N

LET