modeftly fat at fome diftance, and on the oppofite fide of the ambaffadors: the Perfians requested that they might be directed to approach nearer, or be fent away; "for," added they," they are the Pains of the "Eye."-HERODOT. Terpfich. ch. xviii.

The expreffion fails under the cenfure of the critic, as unbecoming; but he owns, at the fame time, that there may be fomething urged in defence of it, as the fpeakers were barbarians, and in liquor.

But, without any fuch allowances, it may be excused, nay vindicated, by the following fuggeftion. The fentiment is not general: they did not mean (as LONGINUS feems to think) that a woman's being beautiful made her painful to the eye; but that the women they fent for, fitting down at such a distance, they were painful to the eye, merely because they fat not nearer. A few fucceeding paffages in HERODOTUS fufficiently confirm this comment; for the women, changing their feats, approached to the ambafladors, and a vifible fatisfaction arofe in their minds.

Dr.

Dr. PEARCE, whofe accuracy has given birth to the most valuable edition of LONGINUS, afferts, that feveral confiderable commentators have mifinterpreted the meaning of the critic, who blames the expreffion, because thefe pretty women non funt dolores ipfi,

"fed dolores fortaffe excitant:"

The doc

tor therefore pronounces, that this cenfure is limited to the harfhnefs of the metonymy. But how he can conclude his note with a fuppofition, that LONGINUS would have made no objection to the title of "Darts of "the Eyes," applied by ALEXANDER to the Perfian women, or to the appellation of HELEN," the tender Dart of the Eyes," in ÆSCHYLUS, is fomewhat difficult to reconcile; for the expreffion in the text is introduced generally, as the others, without regard to the particular occafion on which it is mentioned; which LONGINUS, as a critic, ought certainly to have explained. The omiffion of it forms the apparent frigidity of the thought.

On the whole, the phrafe in HERODOTUS, however irreconcileable to the taste of an old Grecian, is altogether conformable to the genius of English compofition; and as fuch I will venture to defend it.

A

NY man may be a writer; but to be a good one, ❝ hoc opus, hic labor "eft." The author, who hastily gets into print, bids fair never to be out of print. Reflection prevents the neceffity of amendment: the flights of expedition are the flights of ICARUS, though with fome alteration, for the former give a name to nothing. OVID had genius, but too little accuracy: VIRGIL poffeffed both. Examine their descriptions, and prefer the firft if you can. By the way, I have always wondered, that OVID, parti cularly his (Arabian Nights') Metamorpho

fes,

fes, fhould be fo conftantly placed in the hands of boys. He is a poet of vitiated expression, and particularly ill-adapted to youth, though commonly admitted to the perufal of youth alone.

ORIG.—Επισκέπλεον μη τι πόνημα μεγεθές φαντάσιαν ἔχει.

HE critic enters into a comparison be

TH

tween the extrinfic and intrinfic Excellencies of Character, and those of Compofition. To refpect a man as good, because he is rich, though the ufual incenfe of defigning flattery, is abfurd. The mind is more frequently debafed, than improved by wealth. A difinterested liberality fets a mark of honor, which avarice feeks in vain. What fortune has beftowed, fortune may take

C 3

take away; or vanity, luxury, and pleasures, of the most degrading fort, may pull down those mountains, on which virtue never fhone,

Thus in Compofition. Though this age, too little diftinguished by reflection, fantaftically prefers a superficial exterior of witticifm and humor to intrinfic folidity, yet its judgement cannot be admired; nor is the author much indebted for applause to fuch trivial excellence he writes for a day, and for a day only will he be read. *

But perhaps works of imagination are still lefs efteemed; for the fmall portion of readers feems limited to performances of a more philofo

*It is odious to hear the most exceptionable parts of the late Mr. STERNE'S compofitions fo repeatedly cried up, without the least regard (but from those unfashionable few, who can feel) to the more ftriking paffages. Can the latter forget LE FEVRE, or not wish to forget.

***** ?