of it are told in the most distinct manner, and grow out of one another in the most natural order.

The third qualification of an epic poem is its Great nefs. The anger of Achilles was of such confequence that it embroiled the kings of Greece, destroyed the heroes of Afia, and engaged all the gods in factions. Æneas's settlement in Italy produced the Cæfars, and gave birth to the Roman empire. Milton's fubject was ftill greater than either of the former; it does not determine the fate of single persons or nations, but of a whole fpecies. The united powers of Hell are joined together for the destruction of mankind, which they effected in part, and would have completed, had not Omnipotence itself interpofed. The principal actors are Man in his greatest perfection, and Woman in her highest beauty. Their enemies are the fallen Angels; the Meffiah their friend, and the Almighty their protector. In short, every thing that is great in the whole circle of being, whether within the verge of Nature or cut of it, has a proper part affigned it in this admirable Poem.

In poetry, as in architecture, not only the whole, but the principal members, and every part of them, fhould be great. I will not prefume to say that the book of Games in the Æneid, or that in the Iliad, are not of this nature; nor to reprehend Virgil's simile of the Top, and many other of the fame kind in the Iliad, as liable to any cenfure in this particular; but I think we may fay, without derogating from those

wonderful performances, that there is an indisputable and unquestioned magnificence in every part of Paradise Loft, and indeed a much greater than could have been formed upon any Pagan system.

But Aristotle, by the Greatness of the Action, does not only mean that it should be great in its nature, but also in its duration; or, in other words, that it should have a due length in it, as well as what we properly call Greatnefs. The juft measure of this kind of magnitude he explains by the following fimilitude. An animal, no bigger than a mite, cannot appear perfect to the eye, because the fight takes it in at once, and has only a confused idea of the whole, and not a distinct idea of all its parts: if, on the contrary, you should suppose an animal of ten thousand furlongs in length, the eye would be fo filled with a fingle part of it, that it could not give the mind an idea of the whole. What these animals are to the eye, a very short or a very long Action would be to the memory. The first would be, as it were, loft and fwallowed up by it, and the other difficult to be contained in it. Homer and Virgil have shown their principal art in this particular; the Action of the Iliad and that of the Æneid, were in themselves exceeding fhort, but are fo beautifully extended and diversified by the invention of episodes, and the machinery of gods, with the like poetical ornaments, that they make up an agreeable story, fufficient to employ the memory, without overcharging it. Milton's Action is

enriched with fuch a variety of circumstances, that I have taken as much pleasure in reading the Contents of his Books, as in the best invented story I ever met with. It is poffible that the traditions on which the Iliad and Æneid were built had more circumstances in them than the history of the fall of Man, as it is related in Scripture: besides, it was easier for Homer and Virgil to dash the truth with fiction, as they were in no danger of offending the religion of their country by it; but as for Milton, he had not only a very few circumstances upon which to raise his Poem, but was also obliged to proceed with the greatest caution in every thing that he added out of his own invention. And, indeed, notwithstanding all the restraints he was under, he has filled his story with so many furprising incidents, which bear so close analogy with what is delivered in Holy Writ, that it is capable of pleasing the most delicate reader, without giving offence to the most scrupulous.

The modern critics have collected, from several hints in the Iliad and Æneid, the space of time which is taken up by the Action of each of those poems; but as a great part of Milton's ftory was tranfacted in regions that lie out of the reach of the fun and the fphere of day, it is impoffible to gratify the reader with such a calculation, which indeed, would be more curious than instructive; none of the critics, either ancient or modern, having laid down rules to cir

1

cumfcribe the Action of an epic poem within any determined number of years, days, or hours. But of this more particularly hereafter.

Having examined the Action of Paradise Loft, let us, in the next place, confider the Actors. This is Aristotle's method of confidering; first, the Fable; and, fecondly, the Manners; or, as we generally call them in English, the Fable and the Characters.

Homer has excelled all the heroic poets that ever wrote in the multitude and variety of his Characters. Every god that is admitted into his poem acts a part which would have been suitable to no other deity. His princes are as much distinguished by their manners as by their dominions; and even those among them whose characters feem wholly made up of courage, differ from one another as to the particular kinds of courage in which they excel. In short, there is scarce a speech or ́action in the Iliad which the reader may not ascribe to the person that speaks or acts, without seeing his name at the head of it.

Homer does not only outshine all other poets in the variety, but also in the novelty of his Characters. He has introduced among his Grecian princes a person who had lived in three ages of men, and conversed with Thefeus, Hercules, Polyphemus, and the first race of heroes. His principal Actor is the son of a goddess, not to mention the offspring of other deities, who have likewise a place in his poem, and the venerable Trojan prince who was the father of so many

kings and heroes. There is in these several Characters of Homer a certain dignity, as well as novelty, which adapts them in a more peculiar manner to the nature of an heroic poem: though, at the fame time, to give them the greater variety, he has described a Vulcan, that is, a buffoon, among his gods, and a Therfites, among his mortals.

Virgil falls infinitely fhort of Homer in the Characters of his poem, both as to their variety and novelty. Æneas is indeed a perfect character; but as for Achates, though he is styled the hero's friend, he does nothing in the whole poem which may deserve that title. Gyas, Mnestheus, Sergeftus, and Cloanthus, are all of them men of the fame stamp and character.

fortemque Gyan, fortemque Cloanthum.

Virg.

There are, indeed, several very natural incidents in the part of Afcanius, as that of Dido cannot be sufficiently admired. I do not see any thing new or particular in Turnus. Pallas and Evander are remote copies of Hector and Priam, as Laufus and Mezentius are almost parallels to Pallas and Evander. The characters of Nifus and Eurialus are beautiful, but common. We must not forget the parts of Sinon, Camilla, and fome few others, which are fine improvements on the Greek poet. In short, there is neither that variety nor novelty in the persons of the Æneid, which we meet with in thofe of the Iliad.

If we look into the Characters of Milton, we shall find that he has introduced all the variety his fable