"To conclude: Because Precepts ought to be concise, that they may be more easily understood, and more strongly retain'd in the Memory; and because nothing can be more effectual to this Purpose than the proposing one single Idea, and collecting all Things so well together, that they may be present to the Mind at once; the Poets have reduc'd all to one single Action, under one and the same Design, and in a Body whose Members and Parts should be homogeneous. Hence arise two of Horace's Rules: The one,
[481] Quicquid præcipies, esto brevis, ut cito dicta Percipiant animi dociles, teneantque fideles.
Let all your Precepts be succinct and clear, That ready Wits may comprehend them soon. Roscom.
the other,
[482] Denique sit quod vis simplex duntaxat, & unum."
Be what you will, so you be still the same. Roscom.
This is Bossu's Account of the Origin and Nature of Epic Poetry.
Thirty-first Lecture.
Under this Head there is very little Room to make any Comparison between the Ancients and the Moderns; for these latter Ages have scarce produc'd any Thing that deserves the Name of an Epic Poem. We know our Countryman, Mr. Dryden's Judgment, about a Poem of Chaucer's, truly beautiful, indeed, and worthy of Praise; namely, that it was not only equal, but even superior to the Iliad and Æneid: But we know, likewise, that his Opinion was not always the most accurate, nor form'd upon the severest Rules of Criticism. What was in Hand, was generally most in Esteem; if it was uppermost in his Thoughts, it was so in his Judgment too. I am sure, the Opinion is too monstrous to deserve a serious Refutation. But even among the Ancients themselves, if you except Homer and Virgil, you will scarce find one that is truly an Epic Poet. The heroic Laurels are due to them only; nor has the World produc'd two more such Heroes, no, nor one. How far a Comparison is to be made between this immortal Pair, and what, in my Opinion, is to be determin'd, with Regard to their different Merits, I have declar'd at large in another Place[483], and given some Reasons for my Sentiments; namely, that Virgil is much indebted to Homer; but that Homer's Works are inferior to Virgil's.
The Poems of Lucan and Silius Italicus, are rather historical, than heroic; their Actions are real, not fictitious; particular, not universal: But partake, in some Measure, of the Nature of Epic; as they are Poems of a considerable Length, express'd in Narration, and written in Heroic Verse; each of them have their Heroes; the Thoughts and Language are sublime, or they would have us think so, and there are some Degrees of Fiction interwoven with Truth. They are reducible, therefore, to this Class, and their Authors have a Right to be mention'd in it. Lucan, however liable to Censure in some Things, is, upon the whole, far from being a mean Writer, and deserves a very considerable Character. He is sometimes harsh, and over-stoical; sometimes cold, and too nearly allied to Prose; and, again, on the other Hand, he is swelling, bombast, and affects a Way of Expression ridiculously lofty; and yet, in many Things, very elegant and sublime, and full of an heroic Spirit. As to Silius Italicus, Pliny, in one of his Epistles[484], has given the following Character: Scribebat carmina majore cura, quam ingenio. Virgilii natalem, religiosius quam suum, celebrabat; Neapoli maxime, ubi monumentum ejus adire, ut templum, solebat "He wrote Verses with more Pains, than Genius; he observ'd Virgil's Birth-Day more religiously than his own, especially at Naples, where he us'd to frequent his Monument as if it had been a Temple." And since he lov'd Virgil so passionately, that he almost ador'd him, it is strange he should not have come nearer to his Style. The same may be said of Lucan. How much unlike to Virgil's! It is, also, as evident, that Statius rather admir'd Virgil than imitated him. He therefore says very justly,