tion. Refnel, in his Preface to Pope's Effay, remarks, that Garth exhibits no difcrimination of characters; and that what any one fays might with equal propriety have been faid by another. The general defign is perhaps open to criticism; but the compofition can feldom be charged with inaccuracy or negligence. The author never flumbers in felf-indulgence; his full vigour is always exerted; fcarcely a line is left unfinished, nor is it easy to find an expreffion used by constraint, or a thought imperfectly expreffed. It was remarked by Pope, that the Difpenfary had been corrected in every edition, and that every change was an improvement. It appears, however, to want fomething of poetical ardour, and fomething of general delectation; and therefore, fince it has been no longer fupported by accidental and intrinfick popularity, it has been scarcely able to fupport itself.

ROWE.

N'

ICHOLAS ROWE was born at Little Beckford, in Bedfordshire, in 1673. His family had long poffeffed a considerable eftate, with a good house, at Lambertoun* in Devonihire. The ancestor from whom he defcended in a direct line received the arms borne by his descendants for his bravery in the Holy War. His father, John Rowe, who was the first that quitted his paternal acres to practise any art of profit, professed the law, and published Benlow's and Dallifon's Reports in the reign of James the Second, when, in oppofition to the notions, then diligently propagated, of difpenfing power, he ventured to remark how low his authors rated the prerogative. He was made a ferjeant, and died April 30, 1692. He was buried in the Temple church.

* In the Villare, Lamerton. Orig. Edit.

Nicholas

Nicholas was first sent to a private school at Highgate; and, being afterwards removed to Westminster, was at twelve years chofen one of the king's fcholars. His master was Busby, who fuffered none of his scholars to let their powers lie useless; and his exercises in several languages are faid to have been written with uncommon degrees of excellence, and yet to have coft him very little labour.

At fixteen he had, in his father's opinion, made advances in learning fufficient to qualify him for the study of law, and was entered a student of the Middle Temple, where for fome time he read ftatutes and reports with proficiency proportionate to the force of his mind, which was already such that he endeavoured to comprehend law, not as a feries of precedents, or collection of pofitive precepts, but as a fyftem of rational government, and impartial justice.

When he was nineteen, he was by the death of his father left more to his own direction, and probably from that time suffered law gradually to give way to poetry. At twenty-five he produced the Ambitious

*He was not elected till 1688. N.
U 3

Step

Step-Mather, which was received with fo much favour, that he devoted himself from that time wholly to elegant literature.

His next tragedy (1702) was Tamerlane, in which, under the name of Tamerlane, he intended to characterize king William, and Lewis the Fourteenth under Bajazet. The virtues of Tamerlane feem to have been arbitrarily affigned him by his poet, for I know not that history gives any other qualities than those which make a conqueror. The fashion, however, of the time was, to accumulate upon Lewis all that can raife horror and deteftation; and whatever good was withheld from him, that it might not be thrown away, was bestowed upon king William.

This was the tragedy which Rowe valued most, and that which probably, by the help of political auxiliaries, excited most applaufe; but occafional poetry must often content itself with occafional praife. Tamerlane has for a long time been acted only once a year, on the night when king Wil、 liam landed. Our quarrel with Lewis has been long over; and it now gratifies neither zeal nor malice to fee him painted with aggravated features, like a Saracen upon a fign.

The

The Fair Penitent, his next production (1703), is one of the most pleasing tragedies on the ftage, where it ftill keeps its turns of appearing, and probably will long keep them, for there is fcarcely any work of any poet at once fo interesting by the fable, and fo delightful by the language. The story is domestick, and therefore easily received by the imagination, and affimilated to common life; the diction is exquifitely harmonious, and foft or fpritely as occafion requires.

The character of Lothario feems to have been expanded by Richardfon into Lovelace; but he has excelled his original in the moral effect of the fiction. Lothario, with gaiety which cannot be hated, and bravery which cannot be despised, retains too much of the fpectator's kindness. It was in the power of Richardfon alone to teach us at once esteem and deteftation, to make virtuous refentment over-power all the benevolence which wit, elegance, and courage, naturally excite; and to lose at laft the hero in the villain.

The fifth act is not equal to the former; the events of the drama are exhaufted, and