and the variety of matters contained in them, the Lucilius came into the world, when Pacuvius satires of Horace are entirely like them; only flourished most; he also made satires after the Ennius, as I said, confines not himself to one manner of Ennius, but he gave them a more sort of verse, as Horace does ; but, taking example graceful turn; and endeavoured to imitate more from the Greeks, and even from Homer himself in closely the Vetus Comædia of the Greeks : of the his Margites, which is a kind of satire, as Scaliger which the old original Roman satire had no idea, observes, gives himself the licence, when one sort till the time of Livius Andronicus. And though of numbers comes not easily, to run into another, Horace seems to have made Lucilius the first as his fancy dictates. For he makes no difficulty author of satire in verse amongst the Romans, in to mingle hexameter with iambic trimeters, or these words, Quid cum est Lucilius ausus primus with trochaic tetranieters; as appears by those in hunc operis componere carmina morem : he is fragments which are yet remaining of him: Horace only thus to be understood, that Lucilius had given has thought him worthy to be copied ; inserting a more gracefal turn to the satire of Enpius and many things of his into his own satires, as Virgil Pacuvius; not that he invented a new satire of his has done in his Æneid.

own : and Quintilian seems to explain this passage Here we have Dacier making out that Ennius of Ilorace, in these words : Satira quidem tota was the first satirist in that way of writing, which nostra est, in qua primus insignem laudem adeptus was of his invention ; that is, satire abstracted

est Lucilius. from the stage, and new modelled into papers of

Thus, both Horace and Quintilian give a kind of verse, on several subjects. But he will have

primacy of honour to Lucilius, among the Latin Ennius take the groundwork of satire from the satirists. For as the Roman language grew more first farces of the Romans, rather than from the refined, so much more capable it was of receiving formed plays of Livius Andronicus, which were the Grecian beauties in his time: Horace and copied from the Grecian comedies. It may pos- Quintilian could mean no more, than that Lucilius sibly be so; but Dacier knows no more of it than writ better than Ennius and Pacuvius: and on I do. And it seems to me the more probable the same account we prefer Horace to Lucilius: opinion, that he rather imitated the fine railleries both of them imitated the old Greek comedy ; of the Greeks, which he saw in the pieces of and so did Ennius and Pacuvius before them. The Andronicus, than the coarseness of all his old polishing of the Latin tongue, in the succession of countrymen, in their clownish extemporary way times, made the only difference. And Horace of jeering.

himself, in two of his satires, written purposely on But, besides this, it is universally granted, that this subject, thinks the Romans of his age were Ennius, though an Italian, was excellently learned too partial in their commendations of Lucilius; in the Greek language. llis verses were stuffed who writ not only loosely, and muddily, with with fragments of it, even to a fault: and he him- | little art, and much less care, but also in a time self believed, according to the Pythagorean opinion, when the Latin tongue was not yet sufficiently that the soul of Homer was transfused into him: purged from the dregs of barbarism; and many which Persius observes in his sixth satire : post- significant and sounding words, which the Romans' quam destertuit esse Næonides. But this being wanted, were not admitted even in the times of only the private opinion of so inconsiderable a

Lucretius and Cicero, of which both complain. man as I am, I leave it to the farther disquisition But, to proceed, Dacier justly taxes Casaubon, of the critics, if they think it worth their notice. saying, that the satires of Lucilius were wholly Most evident it is, that whether he imitated the different in specie, from those of Ennius and Roman farce, or the Greek cornedies, he is to be Pacuvius. Casaubon was led into that mistake by acknowledged for the first author of Roman satire, Diomedes the grammarian, who in effect says this: as it is properly so called, and distinguished from satire, among the Romans, but not among the any sort of stage-play.

Greeks, was a biting invective poem, made after Of Pacuvjus, who succeeded him, there is little the model of the ancient comedy for the repre-' to be said, because there is so little remaining of hension of vices : such as were the poems of him: only that he is taken to be the nephew of Lucilius, of Horace, and of Persius. But in former Emius, his sister's son; that in probability he times, the name of satire was giren to poems, was instructed by his uncle, in his way of satire, which were composed of several sorts of verscs: which we are told he has copied; but what ad- such as were made by Ennius and Pacuvius: more vances he made, we know not

fully expressing the etymology of the word satire,

from salura, which we have observed. Here it is This sort of satire was not only composed of manifest, that Diomedes makes a specifical dis- several sorts of verse, like those of Ennius, but tinction betwixt the satires of Ennius and those was also mixed with prose; and Greek was of Lucilius. But this, as we say in English, is sprinkled amongst the Latit. Quintilian, after only a distinction; without a difference; for the he had spoken of the satire of Lucilius, adds what reason of it is ridiculous, and absolutely false. follows: “ There is another and former kind of This was that which cozened honest Casaubon, satire, composed by Terentius Varro, the most who, relying on Diomedes, had not sufficiently learned of the Romans: in which he was not examined the origin and nature of those two

satisfied alone with mingling in it several sorts of satires: which were entirely the same, both in the verse.” The only difficulty of this passage is, matter and the form. Por all that Lucilius per- that Quintilian tells us, that this satire of Varro formed beyond his predecessors, Ennius and

was of a former kind. For how can we possibly Pacuvius, was only the adding of more politeness, imagine this to be, since Varro, who was contemand more salt; without any change in the sub- porary to Cicero, must consequently be after stance of the poem: and though Lucilius put not

Lucilius? Quintilian meant not, that the satire together in the same satire several sorts of verses, of Varro was in order of time before Lucilius; he as Ennius did ; yet he composed several satires, of would only give us

to understand, that the several sorts of verses, and mingled them with Varronian - satire, with a mixture of several sorts Greek verses: one poem consisted only of hexame- of verses, was more after the manner of Ennius ters; and another was entirely of iambics ; a and Pacuvius, than that of Lucilius, who was third of trochaics; as is visible, by the fragments more severe, and more correct; and gave himself yet remaining of his works. In short, if the satires less liberty in the mixture of bis verses, in the of Lucilius are therefore said to be wholly different same poem. from those of Ennius, because he added much We have nothing remaining of those Varronian more of beauty and polishing to his own poems, satires, excepting some inconsiderable fragments, than are to be found in those before hiin; it will and those for the most part much corrupted. follow from hence, that the satires of Horace are The titles of many of them are indeed preserved, wholly different from those of Lucilius, because and they are generally double : from whence, at Horace has not less surpassed Lucilius in the least, we may understand, how many various elegancy of his writing, than Lucilius surpassed subjects were treated by that aathor. Tully, in Ennius in the turn and ornament of his. This his Academics, introduces Varro himself, giving passage of Diomedes has also drawn Dousa, the

us some light concerning the scope and design son, into the same errour of Casaubon, which I say, of those works. Wherein, after he had shown his not to expose the little failings of those judicious reasons why he did not er professo write of philomen, but only to make ist appear, with how much sophy, he adds what follows. Notwithstanding, diffidence and caution we are to read their works, says he, that those pieces of mine, wherein I have when they treat a subject of so much obscurity, imitated Menippus, though I have not translated and so very ancient, as is this of satire.

him, are sprinkled with a kind of mirth and Having thus brought down the history of satire gaiety: yet many things are there inserted which from its original, to the times of Horace, and

are drawn from the very intrails of philosophy, shown the several changes of it; 1 should here and many things severely argued: which I have discover some of those graces which Horace added mingled with pleasantries on purpose that they to it, but that I think it will be more proper to may more easily go down with the common sort defer that undertaking, till I make the comparison of unlearned readers. The rest of the sentence is betwixt himn and Juvenal. In the meanwbile, so lame, that we can only make thus much out of following the order of time, it will be necessary to it; that in the composition of his satires, he so say somewhat of another kind of satire, which also tempered philology with philosophy, that his work was descended from the ancients: it is that wbich was a mixture of them both. 'And Tully himself we call the l'arronian satire, but which Varro him- confirms ns in this opinion; when a little after he self calls the Menippean; because Varro, the most addresses himself to Varró in these words: “And. learned of the Romans, was the first anthor of it, you yourself have composed a most elegant and who imitated, in bis works, the manner of Menip- complete poem; you have begun philosophy in pus, the Gariarenian, who professed the philosophy many places: sufficient to incite us, though too of the Cynics.

little to instruct us." Thus it appears, that Varro

was one of those writers whom they called orovdo only, as 'Dacier has observed before me, we may greaciót, studious of laughter; and that, as learned take notice, that the word satire is of a more as he was, his business was more to divert bis general signification in Latin, than in French, er reader, than to teach him. And he entitled his English. Por amongst the Romans it was not own satires Menippean: not that Menippus bad only used for those discourses which decried vice, written ang satires (for his were either dialogues or exposed folly; but for others also, where virtue or epistles), but that Varro imitated bis style, was recommended. But in our modern languages his manner, his facetiousness. All that we know

we apply it only to the invective poems, where farther of Menippus and his writings, which are

the very name of satire is formidable to those wholly lost, is, that by soine he is esteemed, as,

persons, who would appear to the world, what amongst the rest, by Varro: by others he is noted they are not in themselves. For in English, to of cynical impudence, and obscenity: that he say satire, is to mean reflection, as we use that was much given to those parodies, which I have word in the worst sense; or as the French call it, already mentioned ; that is, he often quoted the

more properly, medisance. In the criticism of verses of Homer and the tragic poets, and turned spelling, it ought to be with i, and not with y, to their serious meaning into something that was distinguish its true derivation from satura, not ridiculous ; whereas Varro's satires are by Tully from Satyrus. And if this be so, then it is false called absolute, and most elegant, and various spelled throughout this book; for here it is written poems. Lucian, who was emulous of this Menip- satyr. Which having not considered at the first, pus, seems to have imitated both his manners and I thought it not worth correcting afterwards. But his style in many of his dialogues; where Menip- the French are more nice, and never spell it any pus bimself is often introduced as a speaker in other way than satire. them, and as a perpetual buffoon · particularly I am now arrived at the most difficult part of his character is expressed in the beginning of that my undertaking, which is, to compare Horace dialogue, which is called Nexuonarria. But Varro, with Juvenal and Persius. It is observed by in imitating him, avoids his impudence and filthi- Rigaltius, in his preface before Juvenal, written ness, and only expresses his witty pleasantry. to Thuanus, that these three poets have all their

This we may believe for certain, that as his particular partisans, and favourers : erery comsubjects were various, so most of them were tales mentator, as he has taken pains with any of them, or stories of his own invention. Which is also thinks himself obliged to prefer his author to the manifest from antiquity, by those authors who are other two: to find out their failings, and decry acknowledged to have written Varronion satires, them, that he may make room for his own darling. in imitation of his : of whom the chief is Petronius Such is the partiality of mankind, to set up that Arbiter, whose satire, they say, is now printed in interest which they have once espoused, though Holland, wholly recovered, and made complete : it be to the prejudice of truth, morality, and when it is made public, it will easily be seen by

common justice: and especially in the productions any one sentence, whether it be supposititious, or of the brain. As authors generally think themgenuine. Many of Lucian's dialogues may also selves the best poets, because they cannot go out be properly called Varronian satires ; particularly of themselves to judge sincerely of their betters; his True History: and consequently the Golden

so it is with critics, who, having first taken a ass of Apuleius, which is taken from him. Of the liking to one of these poets, proceed to cominent same stamp is the Mock Deification of Claudius,

on him, and to illustrate him: after which, they by Seneca: and the Symposium, or Cæsars of fall in love with their own labours, to that degree Julian the emperor. Amongst the moderns we of blind fondness, that at length they defend and may reckon the Encomium Moriæ of Erasmus, exalt their author, not so much for his sake as Barclay's Euphormio, and a volume of German for their own. It is a folly of the same nature, authors, which my ingenious friend Mr. Charles with that of the Romans themselves, in their Killigrew once lent me. In the English I remem

games of the Circus; the spectators were divided ber none, which are mixed with prose, as Varro's in their factions, betwixt the Veneti and the were: but of the same kind is Mother Hubbard's Prasini : some were for the charioteer in blue, Tale in Spenser; and (if it be not too vain to and some for him in green. The colours themmention any thing of my own) the poems of selves were but a fancy; but when once a man Absalom and Mac Flecno.

had taken pains to set out those of his party, and This is what I have to say in general of satire: bad been at the trouble of procuring voices for

them, the case was altered : he was concerned | Horace; and yet, in some things, to be preferred for his own labour; and that so earnestly, that to both of them. disputes and quarrels, animosities, commotions, First, then, for the verse, neither Casaubon himand bloodshed, often happened: and in the de- self, nor any for him, can defend either his numclension of the Grecian empire, the very sovereigns bers, or the purity of his Latin. Casaubon gives themselves engaged in it, even when the Bar- this point for lost; and pretends not to justify barians were at their doors; and stickled for the either the measures, or the words of Persius : he preference of colours, when the safety of their is evidently beneath Horace and Juvenal, in people was in question. I am now myself on the both. brink of the same precipice; I have spent some Then, as his verse is scabrous, and hobbling, time on the translation of Juvenal and Persius ; and his words not every where well chosen, the and it behoves me to be wary, lest, for that purity of Latin being more corrupted than in the reason, I should be partial to them, or take a time of Juvenal, and consequently of Horace, who prejudice against Horace. Yet, on the other side, writ when the language was in the height of its I would not be like some of our judges, who would perfection ; so his diction is hard ; his figures are give the cause for a poor man, right or wrong: generally too bold and daring; and his tropes, parfor though that be an errour on the better hand, ticularly his metaphors, insufferably strained. yet it is still a partiality: and a rich man un- In the third place, notwithstanding all the diliheard, cannot be concluded an oppressor. I re- gence of Casaubon, Stelluti, and a Scotch gentlemember a saying of king Charks II. on sir man (whom I have heard extremely coinmended Matthew Hales, (who was doubtless an uncorrupt for his illustrations of him), yet he is still obscure : and upright man) that his servants were sure to whether he affected not to be understood, but with be cast on a trial, which was heard before him : difficulty, or whether the fear of his safety under not that he thought the judge was possible to be Nero compelled him to this darkness in some bribed ; but that his integrity might be too scrupu-. places; or, that it was occasioned by his close lous; and that the causes of the crown were al- way of thinking, and the brevity of his style, and ways suspicious, when the privileges of subjects crowding of his figures; or, lastly, whether, after were concerned.

so long a time, many of his words have been corIt had been much fairer, if the modern critics, rupted, and many customs, and stories relating to who have embarked in the quarrels of their fa- : them, lost to us; whether some of these reasons, vourite authors, had rather given to each his pro- or all, concurred to render him so cloudy; we per due, without taking from another's heap, to may be bold to affirm, that the best of commen. raise their own.

There is praise enough for each tators can but guess at his meaning, in many pasof them in particular, without encroaching on his sages : and none can be certain that he has difellows, and detracting from them, or euriching vined rightly. themselves with the spoils of others. But to come

nel After all, he was a young man, like his friend to particulars : Heinsius and Dacier are the most and contemporary Lucan: both of them men of principal of those, who raise Horace above Ju- extraorưinary parts, and great acquired knowledge, venal and Persius. Scaliger the father, Rigaltius, considering their youth. But neither of them had and many others, debase Horace, that they may arrived to that maturity of judgment, which is set up Juvenal: and Casaubon, who is almost necessary to the accomplishing of a formed poet. single, throws dirt on Juvenal and Horace, that And this consideration, as on the one hand it lays he may exalt Persius, whom he understood par- some imperfections to their charge: so on the ticularly well, and better than any of the former other side, it is a candid excuse for those failings, commentators ; even Stelluti, who succeeded bim. I which are incident to youth and inexperience ; I will begin with him, who, in my opinion, de- i and we have more reason to wonder how they, fends the weakest cause, which is that of Persius; / who died before the thirtieth year of their age, and labouring, as Tacitus prifres

csses of his own could write so well, and think so strongly; than writings, “ to divest myself of partiality, or preju- to accuse them of those faults, from svbich human dice,” consider Persius, not as a poet whom I have ! nature, and more especially in youth, can never wholly translated, and who has cost me more la possibly be exempted. bour and tiine than Juvenal; but according to To consider Persius yet more closely : he rather what I judge to be his own merit ; which I think insulted over vice and folly, than exposed them, not equal, in the main, to that of Juvenal or like Juvenal and Horace. And as chaste and VOL. XIX



modest as he is esteemed, it cannot be denied, | Scaliger; from which nothing could be hiddetle but that in some places be is broad and fulsome, This is indeed a strong compliment, but no deas the latter verses of the fourth satire, and of the fence. And Casaubon, who could not but be sensixth, sufficiently witnessed. And it is to be be- sible of his author's blind side, thinks it time to lieved, that he who coinmits the same crime often, abandon a post that was antenable. He acknowand without necessity, cannot but do it with some ledges that Persius is obscure in some places : but kind of pleasure.

so is Plato, so is Thucydides, so are Pindar, TheoTo come to a conclusion : he is manifestly be- critus, and Aristophanes, amongst the Greek poets; low Horace, because he borrows most of his greatest and even Horace and Juvenal, he might have beauties from him: and Casaubon is so far from added, amongst the Romans. The truth is, Perdenying tbis, that he has written a treatise pur-sius is not sometimes, but generally obscure ; and poscly concerning it; wherein he shows a multi- therefore Casaubon, at last, is forced to excuse tude of his translations from Horace, and his imi- him, by alleging, that it was se defendendo, for tations of him, for the credit of his author, which fear of Nero; and that he was commanded to he calls Imitatio Horatjana.

write so cloudily-by Cornutus, in virtue of holy To these defects, which I casually observed while obedience to his master. I cannot help my own I was translating this author, Scaliger has added opinion ; I think Cornutus needed not to have read others : he calls him, in plain terms, a silly writer, inany lectures to him on that subject. Persius and a trifler; full of ostentation of learning; and, was an apt scholar; and when he was bidden to after all, unworthy to come into competition with be obscure in some places, where his life and Juvenal and Horace.

safety were in question, took the same counsel for After such terrible accusations, it is time to hear all his books; and never afterwards wrote ten lines what his patron Casaubon can allege in his de- together clearly. Casaubon, being upon this fence. Instead of answering, he excuses for the chapter, has not failed, we may be sure, of makmost part; and when he cannot, accuses others ing a compliment to his own dear comment. “ If of the saine crimes. He deals with Scaliger, as a Persius," says he,“ be in himself obscure, yet modest scholar with a master. He compliments my interpretation has made him intelligible.” him with so much reverence, that one would swear There is no question but he deserves that praise, he feared him as much at least as he respected which he has given to himself; but the nature of him. Scaliger will not allow Persius to have any the thing, as Lucretius says, will not admit of a wit: Casaubon interprets this in the mildest sense; perfect explanation. Besides many examples and confesses his author was not good at turning which I could urge, the very last verse of his last things into a pleasant ridicule; or, in other words, satire, upon which he particularly values himself that he was not a laughable writer. That he was in his preface, is not yet sufficiently explicated. ineplus, indeed, but that was non aplissimus ad It is true, Holiday has endeavoured to justify his Jocandum. But that he was ostentatious of his construction; but Stelluti is against it: and for learning, that, by Scaliger's good favour, he denies. my part, I can have but a very dark notion of its Persius showed his learning, but was no boaster As for the chastity of his thoughts, Casaubon deof it; he did ostendere, but not ostentare ; and so, nies not but that one particular passage, in the he says, did Scaliger: where, methinks, Casaubon fourth satire, At si unctus cesses, &c. is not turns it handsoinely upon that supercilious critic, only the most obscure, but the most obscene, of 8:1d silently insinuates that he himself was suffi- | all his works : I understood it; but, for that reaciently vain-glorious, and a boaster of his own son, turned it over. In defence of his boisterous knowledge. All the writings of this venerable mctaphors, he quotes Longinus, who accounts them eensor, continues Casaubon, wbich are revosū as instruments of the sublime; fit to move and zpucócipa, more golden than gold itself, are every stir up the affections, particularly in narration. wbere smelling of thymo, which, like a bee, he has | To which it rnay be replied, that where the tmpe is gatlured from ancient authors : but far be osten- farfetched, and hard, it is fit for nothing but to tation and rain-glory from a gentleman, so well puzzle the understanding; and may be reckoned burn, and so nobly educated, as Scaliger. But, amongst these things of Demosthenes which Æs. says Scaliger, he is so obscure, that he has got chines called baúpata not puuara, that is, probimself the name of Scotinus, a dark writer : digies, not words. It must be granted to Casauaow, says Casaubon, it is a wonder to me that bon, that the knowledge of many things is lost in avy thing could be obscure to the divine wit of our modern ages, which were of familiar aqtice to

« 前へ次へ »