I.a a5 b b4 c3 c d6 d4 e e3 e f4 f5 g4 g5,15 l.
II.a a4 b3 b4 b5 c4 c3 c5 d4 d5 e e4 f3 f3 e5,15 l.
III.a5 b3 b4 a a5 c3 c4 d e e3 d f ~4 f ~6 g4 g5 g7,16 l.
IV.a5 a b b4 b c c c5 d3 d5 e e4 e6,13 l.
V.a a b b c5 c4 c5 d4 e d5 e f f4 g5 g6,15 l.
VI.a a5 b4 b5 c6 d5 d4 c e f5 f4 f5 g4 g e h5 h7,17 l.
VII.a5 a3 b5 b4 b5 c3 c6 d4 e3 e6 d5 f f g4 g7,15 l.
VIII.a2 a b5 b3 c4 c6 d5 d e4 e3 f f4 g6 g h4 h6,16 l.
IX.a4 a5 b4 b c6 c d4 d5 d e3 e6,11 l.

Cowley’s own original stanzas and those of his numerous imitators are of a similar irregular and arbitrary structure; cf. Cowley’s ode Brutus (Poets, v. 303), which has the following stanzaic forms:

I.a4 a b5 b4 c c5 c4 c5 d6 d d5 d4 d5 d6,14 l.
II.a b a a b5 b4 c c d d5 d3 d e4 e5 f3 g3 g4 f6,17 l.
III.a3 a5 b4 b6 c5 c d4 d d e e5 f f4 g ~5 g ~6,15 l.
IV.a a a5 b3 b4 a5 a a4 b5 c4 c d5 d4 e6 e5 f4 f6,17 l.
V.a b5 b4 a6 c2 c5 c4 a c5 c6 d d e4 e5 f3 f g g5 h h4 i i5 i4,,23 l.

Waller’s ode Upon modern Critics (Poets, v. 650) has the following stanzaic forms:

I.a b b4 a c5 c d4 d5 d4 e f5 f f4 e5 f4 g g h5 i3 i h4 k5 k6,23 l.
II.a a4 b3 b c c d4 d5 e f f g4 g5 e3 h i4 i5 h k k4,23 l.
III.a a b b c4 c5 d d e e f f4 e3 f e g4 h5 h g i4 i6,,21 l.
IV.a b b a4 c c5 d3 d4 e5 d4 d f5 f4 g g5 h4 h5 i i5,,19 l.
V.a a b b c4 d5 c3 d e5 e6 f5 f4 g5 g h h4 i3 i6,,18 l.
VI.a4 b3 a b a c c d4 d6 e e4 f f g5 g4 g h5 h i4 i6,,20 l.

All the stanzas are of unequal length and consist of the most various verses (of three, four, mostly five, even six and seven measures) and arrangements of rhymes. Parallel rhymes are very common; but sometimes we have crossed, enclosing, and other kinds of rhyme, as e.g. the system of the Italian terzina. A characteristic feature is that at the end of the stanza very often three parallel rhymes occur, and that, as a rule, the stanza winds up with a somewhat longer line of six or seven measures, as in the Spenserian and the Epithalamium stanza; but sometimes we also find a short final verse.

To these Irregular Pindaric Odes, besides, belong Dryden’s celebrated odes Threnodia Augustalis and Alexander’s Feast, the latter having a more lyrical form, with a short choral strophe after each main stanza; and Pope’s Ode on St. Cecilia’s Day. A long list of references to similar poems from Cowley to Tennyson is given in Metrik, ii, §§ 516–22; amongst these different forms the rhymeless odic stanzas occurring in Dr. Sayers (Dramatic Sketches), Southey (e.g. Thalaba) and Shelley (Queen Mab) are noticeable.

§ 305. To these Irregular Pindaric Odes strong opposition was raised by the dramatist Congreve, who in a special Discourse on the Pindaric Ode (Poets, vii. 509) proved that Pindar’s odes were by no means formed on the model of such an arbitrary strophic structure as that of the so-called Pindaric Odes which had hitherto been popular in English poetry. To refute this false view he explained and emphasized their actual structure (see § [303]), which he imitated himself in his Pindaric Ode addressed to the Queen, written soon after May 20, 1706, and composed in anisometrical rhyming verses. He was mistaken, however, in thinking that he was the first to make this attempt in English. Nearly a hundred years before him, Ben Jonson had imitated Pindar’s odic form on exactly the same principles; in his Ode Pindaric to the memory of Sir Lucius Carey and Sir H. Morison (Poets, iv. 585) we have the strophe (turn), antistrophe (counter-turnnd the epode (stand), recurring four times (cf. Metrik, ii, § 525). Ben Jonson, however, found no followers; so that his attempt had remained unknown even to Congreve. The regular Pindaric Odes by this poet, on the other hand, called forth a great many imitations of a similar kind and structure. For this reason the first three stanzas of Congreve’s Pindaric Ode (Poets, vii. 570) may be quoted here as an example, the scheme of the strophe and antistrophe being a a5 b3 c c4 b5 b6, that of the epode a b a b4 c5 d4 c3 d4 e4 e f g3 g4 f5:

The Strophe.