nefs was more to divert his reader than to teach him. And he intitled his own fatires Menippean: not that Menippus had written any fatires (for his were either dialogues or epiftles,) but that Varro imitated his ftyle, his manner, his facetioufnefs. All that we know farther of Menippus and his writings, which are wholly loft, is, that by fome he is esteemed, as, amongst the reft, by Varro; by others he is noted of Cynical impudence, and obfcenity: that he was much given to those parodies, which I have already mentioned; that is, he often quoted the verfes of Homer and the tragic poets, and turned their ferious meaning into fomething that was ridiculous; whereas Varro's fatires are by Tully called abfolute, and moft elegant, and various poems. Lucian, who was emulous of this Menippus, feems to have imitated both his manners and his ftile in many of his dialogues; where Menippus himself is often introduced as a fpeaker in them, and as a perpetual buffoon particularly his character is expreffed in the beginning of that dialogue, which is called Nxvquartía. But Varro, in imitating him, avoids his impudence and filthinefs, and only expreffes his witty pleasantry.

This we may believe for certain, that as his fubjects were various, fo moft of them were tales or ftories of his own invention. Which is alfo manifest from antiquity, by thofe authors who are acknowledged to have written Varronian fatires, in imitation of his: of whom the chief is Petronius Arbiter, whofe fatire, they fay, is now printed in Holland, wholly recovered, and made compleat: when it is made public, it will eafily be feen by any one fentence, whether it be fuppofititious, or genuine. Many of Lucian's dialogues may alfo properly be called Varronian fatires; particularly his True Hiftory: and confequently the Golden Afs of Apuleius, which is taken from him. Of the fame ftamp is the Mock Deification of Claudius, by Seneca: and the Sympofium, or Cæfars of Julian the Emperor. Amongst

the

the moderns we may reckon the Encomium Moriæ of Erafmus, Barclay's Euphormio, and a volume of German authors, which my ingenious friend Mr. Charles Killigrew once lent me. In the English I remember none, which are mixed with profe, as Varro's were: but of the fame kind is Mother Hubbard's Tale in Spencer; and (if it be not too vain to mention any thing of my own) the poems of Abfalom and Mac

Flecno.

This is what I have to fay in general of fatire: only as Dacier has obferved before me, we may take notice, that the word fatire is of a more general fignification in Latin, than in French, or English. For amongst the Romans it was not only used for those difcourfes which decried vice, or expofed folly; but for others alfo, where virtue was recommended. But in our modern languages we apply it only to the invective poems, where the very name of fatire is formidable to thofe perfons, who would appear to the world, what they are not in themfelves. For in English, to fay fatire, is to mean reflection, as we ufe that word in the worst sense; or as the French call it, more properly, Medifance. In the criticism of fpelling, it ought to be with i, and not with y, to diftinguish its true derivation from fatura, not from Satyrus. And if this be fo, then it is falfe fpelled throughout this book; for here it is written fatyr. Which having not confidered at the first, I thought it not worth correcting afterwards. But the French are more nice, and never spell it any other way than fatire.

I am now arrived at the most difficult part of my undertaking, which is, to compare Horace with Juvenal and Perfius. It is obferved by Rigaltius, in his preface before Juvenal, written to Thuanus, that thefe three poets have all their particular partifans, and favourers: every commentator, as he has taken pains with any of them, thinks himself obliged to prefer his author to the other two: to find out their failings, and decry them, that he may make room VOL. IV. M

for

for his own darling. Such is the partiality of mankind, to set up that intereft which they have once efpoufed, though it be to the prejudice of truth, morality, and common juftice: and efpecially in the productions of the brain. As authors generally think themselves the best poets, because they cannot go out of themselves to judge fincerely of their betters; fo it is with critics, who, having firft taken a liking to one of these poets, proceed to comment on him, and to illuftrate him: after which, they fall in love with their own labours, to that degree of blind fondnefs, that at length they defend and exalt their author, not fo much for his fake as for their own. It is a folly of the fame nature, with that of the Romans themselves, in their games of the Circus; the fpectators were divided in their factions, betwixt the Veneti and the Prafini: fome were for the charioteer in blue, and fome for him in green. The colours themselves were but a fancy; but when once a man had taken pains to fet out thofe of his party, and had been at the trouble of procuring voices for them, the cafe was altered: he was concerned for his own labour; and that fo earneftly, that disputes and quarrels, animofities, commotions, and bloodfhed, often happened; and in the declenfion of the Grecian empire, the very fovereigns themselves engaged in it, even when the barbarians were at their doors; and tickled for the preference of colours, when the fafety of their people was in queftion. I am now, myself on the brink of the fame precipice; I have spent some time on the tranflation of Juvenal and Perfius; and it behoves me to be wary, left for that reafon, I should be partial to them, or take a prejudice againft Horace. Yet, on the other fide, I would not be like fome of our judges, who would give the caufe for a poor man, right or wrong: for though that be an error on the better hand, yet it is ftill a partiality: and a rich man unheard, cannot be concluded an oppreffor. I remember a faying of king Charles II. on Sir Matthew Hales, (who was

doubtless

doubtless an uncorrupt and upright man) That his fervants were fure to be caft on a trial, which was heard before him: not that he thought the judge was poffible to be bribed; but that his integrity might be too fcrupulous: and that the caufes of the crown were always fufpicious, when the privileges of fubjects were concerned.

It had been much fairer, if the modern critics, who have embarked in the quarrels of their favourite authors, had rather given to each his proper due; without taking from another's heap, to raise their own. There is praife enough for each of them in particular, without encroaching on his fellows, and detracting from them, or enriching themfelves with the fpoils of others. But to come to particulars: Heinfius and Dacier are the moft principal of those, who raise Horace above Juvenal and Perfius. Scaliger the father, Rigaltius, and many others, debase Horace, that they may fet up Juvenal and Cafaubon, who is almoft fingle, throws dirt on Juvenal and Horace, that he may exalt Perfius, whom he understood particularly well, and better than any of the former commentators; even Stelluti, who fucceeded him. I will begin with him, who, in my opinion, defends the weakeft caufe, which is that of Perfius; and labouring, as Tacitus profeffes of his own writings, to diveft myself of partiality, or prejudice, confider Perfius, not as a poet whom I have wholly tranflated, and who has coft me more labour and time than Juvenal; but according to what I judge to be his own merit; which I think not equal in the main, to that of Juvenal or Horace; and yet in fome things to be preferred to both of them.

First, then, for the verse, neither Cafaubon himfelf nor any for him, can defend either his numbers, or the purity of his Latin. Cafaubon gives this point for loft; and pretends not to juftify either the meafures, or the words of Perfius: he is evidently beneath Horace and Juvenal, in both.

M 2

Then,

Then, as his verfe is fcabrous, and hobbling, and his words not every where well chofen, the purity of Latin being more corrupted, than in the time of Juvenal, and confequently of Horace, who writ when the language was in the height of its perfection; fo his diction is hard; his figures are generally too bold and daring; and his tropes, partiticularly his metaphors, infufferably strained.

In the third place, notwithstanding all the diligence of Cafaubon, Stelluti, and a Scotch gentleman (whom I have heard extreamly commended for his illuftrations of him;) yet he is ftill obfcure: whether he affected not to be understood, but with difficulty; or whether the fear of his safety under Nero, compelled him to this darkness in fome places; or that it was occafioned by his close way of thinking, and the brevity of his ftyle, and crowding of his figures; or laftly, whether after so long a time, many of his words have been corrupted, and many cuftoms, and ftories relating to them, loft to us; whether fome of these reafons, or all, concurred to render him fo cloudy; we may be bold to affirm, that the best of commentators can but guefs at his meaning, in many paffages and none can be certain that he has divined rightly.

After all, he was a young man, like his friend and contemporary Lucan: both of them men of extraordinary parts, and great acquired knowledge, confidering their youth. But neither of them had arrived to that maturity of judgment, which is neceffary to the accomplishing of a formed poet. And this confideration, as on the one hand it lays fome imperfections to their charge: fo on the other fide, it is a candid excufe for thofe failings, which are incident to youth and inexperience; and we have more reafon to wonder how they, who died before the thirtieth year of their age, could write fo well, and think fo ftrongly; than to accufe them of those faults, from which human nature, and more efpecially in youth, can never poffibly be exempted.

Το