LETTER I.

I SHALL now, according to my Promiſe, ſend you ſome Obſerva⯑tions upon the Rape of the Lock, which is one of the laſt Imitations of the little mimicking Bard, and one of the moſt impertinent; to ſo high a Degree impertinent, that I am afraid of being [2] accus'd of writing a Satire upon Nothing, as my Lord Rocheſter wrote a Panegyrick.

The Faults of this ridiculous Poem begin at the Title-Page. I will not inſiſt upon the fantaſtical Compoſition of the Word Heroi⯑Comical; but I deſire Leave to dwell a little upon the Thing. What can this Author mean by creating in his Readers an Expectation of Pleaſantry, when there is not ſo much as one Jeſt in his Book? Of all Blockheads he is the moſt emphatically Dull, who, to an inſipid tedious Tale, prefixes this impertinent Pre⯑lude; Now, Gentlemen, expect a very good Jeſt! Now, my Maſters, prepare to laugh! Inſtead of Heroi-Comical, it ſhould have been Heroi Tragical, ſince it ſeems there was a Neceſſity for a fantaſtical Word: For there is a great deal of Tragedy in this Poem, but not one Jot of Comedy. But at the ſame Time there is nothing ſo Tragical in it, as what the Author deſigns for Comedy: For when⯑ever he aims at a Jeſt, 'tis ſuch ſad deplora⯑ble Stuff, that he never fails to move Compaſ⯑ſion by it.

But now, Sir, to paſs from the Title-Page to the Dedication; he need not have been at the Trouble of acquainting his fair Patroneſs, that he publiſh'd what he calls his Poem, be⯑fore he had thought of what he calls his Ma⯑chinery: For the Book would have told her that, without the Epiſtle. For what he calls [3] his Machinery has no Manner of Influence upon what he calls his Poem, not in the leaſt promoting, or preventing, or retarding the Action of it; as we ſhall ſhew more plainly when we come to treat of the Machines. He has taken his Machines, he tells us, from the Roſycrucians; and 'tis with them, he tells his fair Patroneſs, that he muſt bring her ac⯑quainted. And how bring her acquainted? Why, he muſt tell her what the Count de Ga⯑balis ſays of them, who has given, it ſeems, the beſt Account that he knows of them. If he had not too much Pride, the natural ne⯑ceſſary Conſequence of his Capacity, to be in⯑ſtructed; (for my Lord Roſcomon is certainly in the Right, when he tells us, that

I would direct him to a better Account of them, which is to be found in a Writer of our own, who is infinitely a better Judge both of Perſons and Things, than the fantaſtick Count de Gabalis: and That is the moſt ingenious and moſt judicious Author of Hudibras, who has given this ſhort Account of the Roſycrucians, in his Comment upon two Lines which are to be found in the Character of Ralpho, the facetious Squire of Hudibras, Canto I. Part 1. [4] and which two I have choſen for the Motto to theſe Letters.

The ſhort Comment upon which is this:

And then upon the Words Verè Adeptus, ſays he,

Thus, if we will believe Butler, who, as we ſaid before, is an admirable Judge both of Books and of Mankind, this judicious Author of the Rape has taken what he calls his Ma⯑chinery, from the Phanatick Extravagance of the moſt ridiculous of all modern Sots; as their Predeceſſors the Gnoſtici were the moſt con⯑temptible ones of all the Antient; a Sect that is as becoming of this merry little Gentleman, as it was of the facetious Squire of Hudibras. And now tell me in good Earneſt, Sir, is not the Fair Lady infinitely oblig'd to him for her new Acquaintance? [5] an Acquaintance very unbecoming Her, tho' very becoming of Him.

Thus, Sir, have I done with the Title-Page and the Epiſtle. I ſhall proceed to Morrow upon the Body of the Book. In the mean time I will aſſure you for your Comfort, that you ſhall never have a Letter of above a Sheet of Paper at a Time upon this impertinent Sub⯑ject. I am, Sir,

LETTER II.

I HOPE mine of the firſt of this Month came to your Hands, which contain'd ſome Reflections upon the Dedication and Title⯑Page of the Rape of the Lock; which latter creates an Expectation of Pleaſantry in us, when there is not ſo much as one Jeſt in the Book.

[6] How much more judiciouſly does Boileau ap⯑pear in the Title-Page of his Lutrin? In a ſottiſh Emulation of which, this and ſeve⯑ral late fantaſtick Poems appear both to you and me to have been writ. Boileau calls his Lutrin an Heroick Poem, and he is ſo far from raiſing an Expectation of Laughter, either in the Title, or in the Beginning of the Poem, that he tells Monſieur de Lamoignon, to whom he addreſſes it, that 'tis a grave Subject, and muſt be read with a grave Countenance.

Butler modeſtly calls his Poem, by the Name of his Hero, Hudibras; and without endeavouring to prepoſſeſs his Reader, leaves the Poem itſelf to work its natural Effect upon him.

But now, Sir, ſince I have ſaid that the Rape of the Lock ſeems to be writ in Imita⯑tion of the Lutrin, (I mean ſo far in Imitation, that the Author had a Mind to get Reputa⯑tion by writing a great many Verſes upon an inconſiderable Subject, as Boileau appears to have done before him;) I believe it will not be diſagreeable to you, if I ſhew the Difference between the Lutrin and this fantaſtick Poem.

The Rape of the Lock is a very empty Trifle, without any Solidity or ſenſible Mean⯑ing; whereas the Lutrin is only a Trifle in [7] Appearance, but under that Appearance car⯑ries a very grave and very important Inſtruc⯑tion: For if that Poem were only what it ap⯑pears to be, Boileau would run counter to the fam'd Rule which he has preſcrib'd to others.

And which Horace has given before him.

And the Rule which my Lord Roſcomon has given for Tranſlations, is certainly more ſtrong for Originals.

[8] Now ſince 'tis impoſſible that ſo judicious an Author as Boileau ſhould run counter to his own, and to the Inſtructions of his Maſter Horace, the Lutrin at the Bottom cannot be an empty Trifle. 'Tis indeed a noble and im⯑portant ſatirical Poem, upon the Luxury, the Pride, the Diviſions, and Animoſities of the Popiſh Clergy. 'Tis true indeed the admirable Addreſs of the Poet has made it in Appear⯑ance a Trifle; for otherwiſe it would not have been ſuffer'd in a bigotted Popiſh Country. But yet Boileau in ſome Places ſeems to have given broad Hints at what was his real Mean⯑ing; as in the following Paſſage.

And this other Paſſage is ſtill more bold.

As the Rape of the Lock is an empty Trifle, it can have no Fable nor any Moral; whereas the Lutrin has both Fable and Moral. 'Tis true, indeed, the Allegory under which that Moral is conceal'd, is not ſo perſpicuous as Boileau would have made it, if it had not been for the Apprehenſion of provoking the [9] Clergy. But, on the other Side, 'tis not ſo obſcure, but that a penetrating Reader may ſee through it. The Moral is, That when Chri⯑ſtians, and eſpecially the Clergy, run into great Heats about religious Trifles, their Animoſity proceeds from the Want of that Religion which is the Pretence of their Quarrel. The Fable is this; ‘Two Perſons being deſerted by true Piety, are embroil'd about a religious Trifle, to the Perplexity and Confuſion of them and theirs: Upon the Return of Piety, they agree to ſet aſide the Trifle about which they dif⯑fer'd, and are reconcil'd, to the Quiet and Satisfaction both of themſelves and their Partizans.’

If you will be pleaſed to compare the Be⯑ginning of the Sixth Canto with the reſt of the Poem, you will eaſily ſee that this Ac⯑count which I have given of the Lutrin is not without Foundation. But you know very well, Sir, that there is not the leaſt Shadow of a Mo⯑ral or Fable in the Rape.

As nothing could be more ridiculous than the writing a full, an exact, and a regular Cri⯑ticiſm upon ſo empty a Buſineſs as this trifling Poem; I will ſay but a Word or two con⯑cerning the Incidents, and ſo have done with what relates immediately to the Deſign. The Intention of the Author in writing this Poem, as we find in the Title-Page, is to raiſe the Mirth of the Reader; and we find by the Ef⯑fects which Hudibras and the Lutrin produce [10] in us, that Butler and Boileau wrote with the ſame Intention. Now you know very well, Sir, that in a Poem which is built upon an Action, Mirth is chiefly to be rais'd by the Incidents. For Laughter in Comedy is chiefly to be excited, like Terror and Compaſſion in Tragedy, by Surprize, when Things ſpring from one another againſt our Expectation. Now whereas there are ſeveral ridiculous In⯑cidents in the Lutrin, as, The Owl in the Pul⯑pit frighting the nocturnal Champions; The Prelate's giving his Benediction to his Adverſa⯑ry, by way of Revenge and Inſult; The Bat⯑tle in the Bookſeller's Shop, &c. And where⯑as there are a thouſand ſuch in Hudibras; There is not ſo much as one, nor the Shadow of one, in the Rape of the Lock: Unleſs the Au⯑thor's Friends will object here, That his perpe⯑tual Gravity, after the Promiſe of his Title, makes the whole Poem one continued Jeſt.

LETTER III.

I COME now to the Characters and the Machines. The Characters in the Lutrin are well mark'd. They are the true Reſem⯑blances of Men, of active Men, who purſue earneſtly what they are about. But there is no ſuch Thing as a Character in the Rape of the Lock. Belinda, who appears moſt in it, is a Chimera, and not a Character. She is repre⯑ſented by the Author perfectly beautiful and well-bred, modeſt and virtuous. Let us now ſee how he ſuſtains theſe Qualities in her, and then we ſhall diſcover what Taſte he has of Nature and of Decorum.

Firſt then he repreſents her perfectly beau⯑tiful:

And thus in the next Page the Sylphs ac⯑coſt her: [12]

And yet in the latter End of this very Canto he makes her owe the greater Part of her Beau⯑ty to her Toilette:

Nay, the very favourite Lock, which is made the Subject for ſo many Verſes, is not ſhewn ſo deſirable for its native Beauty, as for the con⯑ſtant Artifice employ'd about it. Witneſs what Thaleſtris ſays to Belinda juſt after ſhe had loſt it:

Such Artifice muſt deface the Luſtre of Locks which were naturally lovely; and the Toilette muſt of Neceſſity detract from perfect Beauty. The Toilette indeed may add to ſome who are call'd Beauties, or to ſome who would be thought ſuch. A decay'd ſuperannuated Beau⯑ty may receive Advantage from her Toilette, may riſe in her Charms, and by the Help of Spaniſh Red, a purer Bluſh may ariſe. But her counterfeit Charms can pleaſe none who have a Taſte of Nature; according to that of Ti⯑bullus:

But for her who has Youth and Beauty;

[14] Such a one wants neither Flounce nor Furbe⯑low, nor torturing Irons, nor Paper Durance. When God and Nature deſign a Face to pleaſe, the Fair-one, on whom they beſtow it, can ne⯑ver add to Workmanſhip Divine. She may ſpoil it indeed by Induſtry, but can never im⯑prove it. They, who made it, alone know the certain Ways of going to the Heart of Man, and alone can give it thoſe reſiſtleſs inimitable Graces which Induſtry does but ſpoil, and which Artifice does but hide.

Horace was as fond of his Miſtreſs's Hair as any modern Lover can be: Witneſs what he ſays to Maecenas in the twelfth Ode of the ſe⯑cond Book;

And yet as he and the reſt of the antient Poets had an admirable Taſte of Nature, they had quite another Taſte of Beauty than what this Author diſcovers; and believ'd that the brighteſt Ornament, either of the Hair or Face, was Simplicity and a becoming Negligence.

Says Horace to Pyrrha, Ode V. Lib. 1.

[15] And in the eleventh Ode of Lib. 2.

Terence, who every where ſo exactly imi⯑tates Nature, takes a quite different Courſe from this Author to ſhew a touching Beauty. The Paſſage is in the firſt Act of his Phormio:

Here was no Care, neither of Hair, nor Face, nor Shape, and yet how much more charming does this Terentian Virgin appear, ev'n in Rags and Miſery, than Belinda does at her Toilette? I mean to thoſe who have a Taſte of Nature. For ſhe, who ev'n in this miſerable Plight mov'd all Beholders with Pleaſure, and Anti⯑pho with Love, what might ſhe not juſtly be ſuppos'd to do, adorn'd with a cleanly Negli⯑gence and Simplicity? I ſay, adorn'd with them; for it may truly be ſaid of every ac⯑compliſh'd Beauty, what Taſſo ſays of one of his: [16]

And our Ladies who ſpend ſo much Time at their Toilettes would do well to conſider, that, after all the Pains which they take in adorning themſelves, they who are moſt charm'd with their Perſons, endeavour to retrieve their natu⯑ral Beauty in Imagination at leaſt, by diveſting them of their borrow'd Ornaments, and cloathing them in the Simplicity of the rural Habit, when in their Sonnets they transform them to Shepherdeſſes.

But the Author has not only ſhewn Belinda an accompliſh'd Beauty; he repreſents her likewiſe a fine, modeſt, well-bred Lady:

And a little below,

And yet in the very next Canto ſhe appears an arrant Ramp and a Tomrigg;

[17] Muſt not this be the legitimate Offspring of Stentor, to make ſuch a Noiſe as that? The Nymph was within Doors, and ſhe muſt ſet up her Throat at a helliſh Rate, to make the Woods (where, by the by, there are none) and the Canals reply to it. Let us turn to the fifth Canto, and we ſhall ſee her there as loud with Anger, as ſhe is now with Joy:

Well, but his Friends will object here, that this is an Hyperbole; and an Hyperbole is de⯑ſign'd to carry us beyond the Truth, only that it may make us enter more juſtly into it: and that when Virgil ſays of Camilla,

He means only that Camilla was exceeding ſwift of Foot: Why, be it ſo. But then by the ſame Rule, muſt not the Author of the Rape mean, that Belinda ſhouted and roar'd [18] very loud; and that, in ſhort, ſhe made a diabolick Din? Now is Shouting and Roaring proper for a well-bred Lady? Are they not below the Modeſty and the Decency even of thoſe ſonorous Nymphs of the Flood, who haunt the Banks of the vocal Thames between the Bridge and the Tower?

Let us look once more upon the laſt Canto, p. 44. Is ſhe not a terrible Termagant there, and the exact Reſemblance of Magnano's Lady in Hudibras?

But Belinda is not only ſhewn beautiful and well-bred, ſhe is repreſented virtuous too:

And yet in the latter End of the fourth Canto ſhe talks like an errant Suburbian:

Thus, Sir, has this Author given his fine La⯑dy Beauty and good Breeding, Modeſty and Virtue in Words, but has in Reality and in Fact made her an artificial dawbing Jilt; [19] a Tomrig, a Virago, and a Lady of the Lake.

There is no other Character in this Poem worth taking Notice of. I ſhould now come to the Machines, in which you might expect to be entertain'd with ſomething more curious and more ridiculous. But I have already de⯑tain'd you too long, and muſt defer it till the next Opportunity.

LETTER IV.

ACcording to the Promiſe made in my laſt, I am now to treat of the Machines; in the doing which I ſhall lie under a great Diſ⯑advantage: For before I come to thoſe of the Rape, it is neceſſary to ſay ſomething of Ma⯑chines in general, of the Reaſon of introdu⯑cing them, of the Method us'd by the antient Poets in employing them, and of the Prac⯑tice of the greateſt and beſt of the Moderns. [20] 'Tis neceſſary to ſay ſomething to all theſe, in order to ſhew the Abſurdity of our Author's Machines, and his utter Ignorance of the Art he pretends to. But to treat of all theſe in as ample a Manner as the Subject deſerves, would require a Volume: And on the other Side, it would be extravagant to ſpend a great deal of Time to ſo inſignificant an End. But when I conſider that I write to a Gentleman who is perfectly well vers'd in theſe Matters, and who conſequently will comprehend a great deal by a little, I find to my Comfort that it will be eaſy to avoid both thoſe Inconveniences, of ſaying a great deal, and of ſaying no⯑thing.

The Reaſons, that firſt oblig'd thoſe Poets which are call'd Heroic to introduce Machines into their Poems, were,

Firſt, To make their Fable and their Action more inſtructive: For, ſays Boſſu, ‘Lorſque les poetes ſont devenus philoſophes moraux, ils n' ont pas ceſſé d'etre theologiens. Au con⯑traire, la morale quils traitent, les oblige indiſpenſablement, de méler la divinité dans leurs Ouvrages; parceque la conoiſſance, la crainte, & l' amour de Dieu, en un mot, la piete, & la religion ſont les premiers, & les plus ſolides fondements, des autres vertus, & de tout la morale.’

By introducing Machines into their Fables, the Epic Poets ſhew'd two Things, 1. That the great Revolutions in human Affairs are influenc'd [21] by a particular Providence. 2. That the Deity himſelf promotes the Succeſs of an Action form'd by Virtue, and conducted by Prudence. But,

Secondly, The Heroic Poets introduc'd Ma⯑chines into their Fables in order to make thoſe Fables more delightful: For the employing Machines made the Actions of thoſe Poems wonderful; now every Thing that is wonder⯑ful is of courſe delightful. Let us ſee what one of the greateſt Maſters among the Mo⯑derns ſays to this:

This ſays the moſt judicious M. Deſpreaux in his Art of Poetry; and the four laſt Lines remind me here of what I have at large diſcours'd upon other Occaſions, viz. That as the Epic Poets by their Machines made the Actions of their Fables more wonderful and more delightful, as well as more inſtructive; they likewiſe made the poetical Expreſſion more wonderful and more delightful, ſince 'tis from them that they chiefly derive that Greatneſs of Expreſſion which renders their Works ſo Divine.

I ſhall now come to the Practice of the an⯑tient Poets, and the Method which they made uſe of in introducing their Machines, in order to render their Poems more inſtructive and more delightful.

• 1. They took their Machines from the Re⯑ligion of their Country, upon which Account theſe Machines made the ſtronger Impreſſion, and made their Fables, and the Actions of them, probable as well as wonderful; for no⯑thing was more natural than for thoſe antient Heathens to believe that the Powers which they ador'd were wont to intermeddle in human [23] Affairs, and to promote the Succeſs of thoſe Deſigns which they favour'd; and nothing could be more natural for them, than to be⯑lieve that that Deſign muſt proſper which was eſpous'd by Jupiter. But this was not all; for the Machines, by making the Actions of their Poems probable, made them wonderful to Men of Senſe, who never can admire any Thing in Humanity which Reaſon will not let them believe. But,
• 2. The antient Poets made their Machines allegorical, as well as their human Perſons.
• 3. They oppos'd them to one another.
• 4. They ſhew'd a juſt Subordination among them, and a juſt Proportion between their Functions. While one was employ'd about the greateſt and the ſublimeſt Things, ano⯑ther was not buſied about the moſt trifling and moſt contemptible.
• 5. They always made their Machines in⯑fluence the Actions of their Poems; and ſome of thoſe Machines endeavour'd to advance the Action of their reſpective Poem, and others of them endeavour'd to retard it.
• 6. They made them infinitely more power⯑ful than the human Perſons.

But, Secondly, The Practice of the greateſt modern Heroic Poets is conformable to that of the antient.

• 1. They take their Machines from the Re⯑ligion of their Country; witneſs Milton, Cow⯑ley, Taſſo.
• 2. They make them Allegorical.
• 3. They oppoſe them to one another.
• 4. They ſhew a juſt Subordination among them, and a juſt Proportion between their Functions.

The Author of the Rape has run counter to this Practice both of the Antients and Moderns. He has not taken his Machines from the Religion of his Country, not from any Religion, nor from Morality. His Machines contradict the Doctrines of the Chriſtian Re⯑ligion, contradict all ſound Morality; there is no allegorical nor ſenſible Meaning in them; and for theſe Reaſons they give no Inſtruction, make no Impreſſion at all upon the Mind of a ſenſible Reader. Inſtead of making the Ac⯑tion wonderful and delightful, they render it extravagant, abſurd, and incredible. They do not in the leaſt influence that Action; they neither prevent the Danger of Belinda, nor promote it, nor retard it, unleſs, perhaps, it may be ſaid, for one Moment, which is ridi⯑culous. And if here it be objected, that the Author deſign'd only to entertain and amuſe; To that I anſwer, That for that very Reaſon he ought to have taken the utmoſt Care to [25] make his Poem probable, according to the im⯑portant Precept of Horace.

And that we may be ſatisfy'd that this Rule is founded in Reaſon and Nature, we find by conſtant Experience, that any thing that ſhocks Probability is moſt inſufferable in Comedy.

There is no Oppoſition of the Machines to one another in this Rape of the Lock. Um⯑briel the Gnome is not introduc'd till the Action is over, and till Ariel and the Spirits under him, have quitted Belinda.

There is no juſt Subordination among theſe Machines, nor any juſt Proportion between their Functions. Ariel ſummons them together, and talks to them as if he were their Em⯑peror.

Now, Sir, give me leave to ask you one Queſtion: Did you ever hear before that the Planets were roll'd by the aerial Kind? We have heard indeed of Angels and Intelli⯑gences who have perform'd theſe Functions: But they are vaſt glorious Beings, of Celeſtial Kind, and Machines of another Syſtem. Pray which of the aerial Kind have theſe ſublime Employments? For nothing can be more ri⯑diculous, or more contemptible, than the Em⯑ployments of thoſe whom he harangues

There is a Difference almoſt infinite between theſe vile Functions and the former ſublime ones, and therefore they can never belong to Beings of the ſame Species. Which of the aerial Kinds are the Movers of Orbs on high, or the Guardians of Empires below; when he who calls himſelf their Chief, is only the Keeper of a vile Iſeland Cur, and has not ſo [27] much as the Intendance of the Lady's Favourite Lock, which is the Subject of the Poem? But that is entruſted to an inferior Spirit, con⯑trary to all manner of Judgment and De⯑corum.

The Machines that appear in this Poem are infinitely leſs conſiderable than the human Per⯑ſons, which is without Precedent. Nothing can be ſo contemptible as the Perſons, or ſo fooliſh as the Underſtandings of theſe Hob⯑goblins. Ariel's Speech, for the firſt thirty Lines, is one continu'd Impertinence: For, if what he ſays is true, he tells them nothing but what they knew as well as himſelf before. And when he comes at length to the Point, he is full as impertinent as he was in his Ramble before; for after he has talk'd to them of black Omens and dire Diſaſters that threa⯑ten his Heroine, theſe Bugbears dwindle to the breaking a Piece of China, the ſtaining a Pet⯑ticoat, the loſing a Necklace, a Fan, or a Bot⯑tle of Sal Volatile. But we ſhall conſider this Paſſage further when we come to examine the Sentiments; and then we ſhall ſee, that Sawny takes the Change here, and 'tis He, a little Lump of Fleſh, that talks; inſtead of a little Spirit.

That which makes this Speech more ridicu⯑lous, is the Place where it is ſpoken, and that is upon the Sails and Cordage of Belinda's Barge; which is certainly taken from the two Kings of Brentford deſcending in Clouds, and [28] ſinging in the Style of our modern Spirits.

But now, Sir, for the Perſons of theſe Sylphs and Sylphids, you ſee what Ideas the Threats of Ariel give us of them, when he threatens them, that for their Neglect they ſhall

Diſcord is deſcrib'd by Homer with her Feet upon the Earth, and Head in the Skies: Upon which Longinus cries out, That this is not ſo much the Meaſure of Diſcord, as of Homer's Capacity, and Elevation of Genius. Ev'n ſo theſe diminutive Beings of the intellectual World, may be ſaid to be the Meaſure of Mr. Pope's Capacity and Elevation of Genius. They are, indeed, Beings ſo diminutive, that they bear the ſame Proportion to the reſt of the intellectual, that Eels in Vinegar do to the reſt of the material World. The latter are only to be ſeen thro' Microſcopes, and the former only thro' the falſe Optics of a Roſycrucian Under⯑ſtanding.

[29] I ſhall mention but one or two more of the numerous Defects which are to be found in the Machines of this Poem; the one is, The Spirits, which he intends for benign ones, are malignant, and thoſe, which he deſigns for malignant, are beneficent to Mankind. The Gnomes he intends for malignant, and the Sylphs for beneficent Spirits. Now the Sylphs in this Poem promote that Female Vanity which the Gnomes mortify. And Vanity is not only a great Defect in Human Nature, but the Mother of a thouſand Errors, and a thou⯑ſand Crimes, and the Cauſe of moſt of the Misfortunes which are incident to Huma⯑nity.

The laſt Defect that I ſhall take notice of, is, That the Machines in this Poem are not ta⯑ken from one Syſtem, but are double, nay tre⯑ble or quadruple. In the firſt Canto we hear of nothing but Sylphs, and Gnomes, and Sa⯑lamanders, which are Roſycrucian Viſions. In the ſecond we meet with Fairies, Genii, and Daemons, Beings which are unknown to thoſe Fanatick Sophiſters. In the fourth, Spleen and the Phantoms about, are deriv'd from the Powers of Nature, and are of a ſeparate Syſtem. And Fate and Jove, which we find in the fifth Canto, belong to the Heathen Re⯑ligion.

But now, Sir, in treating of theſe Matters, I have, before I perceiv'd it, tranſgreſs'd the [30] Bounds which I preſcrib'd to my ſelf, which I deſire that you would excuſe.

LETTER V.

I HAVE now ſhewn that there is no ſuch Thing as a Fable or Characters in the Poem of the Rape, and that what he calls his Machinery is moſt extravagantly choſen. I now come to the Sentiments, which are more abſurd than the reſt, and of ſuch an odd Com⯑poſition, that they are at one and the ſame Time both trivial and extravagant.

The Abſurdity of the Sentiments begins with the Book, and the Author ſtumbles at the Threſhold.

[31] Where in three Lines there are no leſs than two Errors in the Sentiments. For, in the firſt Place, tho' the Author has neither Fable nor general Action, yet he propoſes to ſing ſomething general, rather than that particular Action which is the Subject of his Poem, and he begins as if he deſign'd to make the Rea⯑der expect a Treatiſe of Love-Quarrels; which Proceeding is juſt contrary to the Practice of Homer, and Virgil, and to the Dictates of right Reaſon. Homer and Virgil had ac⯑compliſh'd Fables, and their Actions at the Bottom were univerſal and allegorical: Yet they each of them propos'd to ſing theſe Actions, as they had particulariz'd them by the Impoſition of Names. Homer begins thus:

And Virgil thus:

In the third Line he does not invoke the Muſe to ſing, but propoſes to do it himſelf: And tho' he names the Muſe immediately af⯑terwards, he does it, forſooth, to acquaint her, that 'tis not ſhe, but Belinda, that is to in⯑ſpire him:

So that he has deſir'd no Aſſiſtance from the Muſe, and none ſhe has afforded him.

The Muſe indeed could not poſſibly aſſiſt him in this Caſe. The Muſe is a Machine like Fate and Jove, belonging originally to the Ethnic Syſtem, and transferr'd ſometimes to the Chriſtian Religion only allegorically; and the Muſe cannot be ſuppos'd to bring him acquainted with Roſycrucian Spirits, which would deſtroy her own Divinity, either as Heathen or Chriſtian, ſince they are Beings utterly unknown, either to the Ethnic Syſtem, or to the Chriſtian Religion: So that 'tis Be⯑linda, and not the Muſe, that is to inſpire him. He introduces her into the Acquaintance of the Sylphs and Sylphids in his Epiſtle, and ſhe is to bring him acquainted with them in the Body of the Book. And now, Sir, is not this very ingeniouſly, and very judiciouſly contriv'd? He has deſir'd no Aſſiſtance from the Muſe, and, as I ſaid before, none he has had from her. The whole Poem ſeems to have been infus'd by a Coquette, and not inſpir'd by a Muſe.

I have already acquainted you, Sir, that I would not in the Examen of this Poem confine my ſelf to an exact and regular Method: For neither is the Subject worth the while, nor [33] ought a Letter to a Friend to be writ with any Reſtraint. I ſhall therefore take the Sentiments of this Poem as they come in my way, without pretending to rank them under their reſpective Claſſes, excepting perhaps the Puns, which are numerous, and by which the Author fre⯑quently ſhocks not only the Dictates of Good Senſe, and the Rules of true Pleaſantry, but thoſe of Grammar and common Engliſh. But thoſe we ſhall omit till we have done with the reſt.

There is in this firſt Canto, pag. 4. a very unlucky Imitation of a Paſſage in the ſixth Book of Virgil.

Which the Author of the Rape has thus imi⯑tated:

Now there is this remarkable Difference be⯑tween theſe two Paſſages, that what Virgil [34] ſays of the Souls in the Elyſian Fields, that they were pleas'd with the ſame Diverſions after Death, of which they were fond in their Life-times, does by no means contradict any Doctrine of that Religion which the Romans deriv'd from the Grecians; but the Paſſage in the Rape ſhocks the fundamental Doctrines of the Chriſtian Religion, and is therefore a moſt abſurd Imitation.

I have already ſhewn, in ſpeaking of the Characters, how injudicious all that Paſſage is, in the 8th and 9th Pages, which relates to the Toilette: And as I do not pretend to ſhew all his Errors, but only ſome few which are very groſs ones, I ſhall now paſs to the ſecond Canto; in which Canto, pag. 11. there is a Remark that cannot but be the Effect of ve⯑ry wiſe and very deep Obſervation:

That is to ſay, Birds are caught by the Heels, and Fiſh by the Jaws, with Horſe-Hair; and Men are hamper'd by the Souls with Wo⯑man's Hair. Tell me truly, Sir, is not this the Effect of very wiſe and very deep Obſer⯑vation? I have been ſo taken with theſe four Verſes, that I could not forbear making the four following in Imitation of them.

In this ſecond Canto, pag. 12. we have ano⯑ther Imitation of Virgil, and one ten times more unhappy than the former in the firſt Canto. The Paſſage of Virgil is in the ſecond Book of the Aeneis:

That is to ſay, If a Captain obtains a Victory, few enquire whether he ow'd it to Stratagem or open Force.

The Imitation is included in the following Lines:

Now the Miſchief of it is, that if a Lover ob⯑tains his Ends by Force, the whole Country makes a very ſevere Enquiry into it, by their [36] Repreſentative, a petty Jury; and if he hap⯑pens to be convicted of it, in that Caſe poor Culprit paſſes his Time but ſcurvily.

In the Letter, which I lately ſent you con⯑cerning the Characters, I mention'd ſeveral of the Sentiments which are to be found in Ariel's Speech: But I know not how I omitted that which follows:

Where, Sir, 'tis eaſy to obſerve, that as 'tis Belinda's Petticoat of which he commits the important Charge to the Sylphs; 'tis the Pet⯑ticoat of the ſame Belinda, according to all Engliſh Meaning, and all true grammatical Conſtruction, that he has known ſo often to fail in ſpight of the Hoops of Whalebone. And now I leave you to judge if there was not Reaſon for telling Mrs. Arabella, in the Epiſtle, that Madam Belinda was not like her.

There ſeems indeed to be a terrible Shock made upon the ſame Petticoat, in the Begin⯑ning of the fifth Canto, pag. 42.

[37] By tough Whalebones he cannot mean thoſe of the Fans, for they are limber enough. Be⯑ſides, Fans were mention'd in the Beginning of this laſt Verſe. The tough Whale-bones then, at he latter End of it, are thoſe of the Petticoat, and could not poſſibly be heard to crack, unleſs a violent Attack had been made upon it.

At the Bottom of Pag. 15. Canto III. there is a very notable Thought:

Now what was this new Stratagem, or theſe new Stratagems? Why, the Baron comes be⯑hind Belinda as ſhe was drinking her Coffee, and, ſnap, off goes the Lock. Now if this was the new Stratagem, what in the Name of Impertinence could be the old one?

But the profoundeſt and wiſeſt Reflections of all, are at the End of this third Canto.

Why, who the Devil, beſides this Bard, ever made a Wonder of it? What! before Troy Town, and triumphal Arches were built, was the cutting off a Lock of Hair a miraculous Thing? But we may very properly apply what he ſays of Steel, and the cutting off a Lock of Hair to Fire, and the burning of a Faggot.

But, Sir, I have once more unawares tranſgreſs'd the Bounds preſcrib'd to my ſelf, and am,

LETTER VI.

THE Complaint which you make of my long Silence, and the Interruption of this weighty Affair, ſeems to be a Return to that Compliment which I deſign'd to make you, by diſcontinuing my Obſervations upon theſe arrant Bawbles. It was in Complaiſance to you that I began to make them; and it was out of Reſpect to your Judgment that I left them off. They began to run into Length, and I thought I might as reaſonably entertain you with voluminous Remarks upon Mites in Cheeſe, or upon Eels in Vinegar, as with te⯑dious Obſervations on Mr. Pope's Poems.

But ſince 'tis your Deſire that I ſhould make an end of what I have begun. I am reſolv'd to comply with it, as far as my Indiſpoſition, and my Affairs, and the Satiety which I have con⯑tracted in ſaying ſo much already, will permit me. For the Difficulty here does not lie in making Remarks, but in Reading. The Faults are ſo groſs and ſo numerous, that there is no more Pleaſure in finding them, than there is in hunting in a Hare-Warren.

[40] I am now come to the Sentiments, which are to be found in the fourth and fifth Cantos of this notable Poem. I ſhall only take no⯑tice of a very few, by which you and your Friends may judge of the whole.

The firſt Thing I ſhall take notice of, is the impertinent Journey of Umbriel the Gnome, who

Now to what Purpoſe does this fantaſtick Being take this Journey? Why, to give Be⯑linda the Spleen. In order to which, Spleen equips him with a Bottle and a Bag, as a Country Dame does her Plough-Jobber, to equip him for his Day's Work.

Now what could be more impertinent than this Journey of Umbriel, or more vain and [41] uſeleſs than this Gift of Spleen, whether we look upon the Bag or the Bottle?

Umbriel deſcends to the central Earth to give Belinda the Spleen. Now 'tis plain, that before his Deſcent he leaves her mad, and up⯑on his Return, finds her in a Fit of the Mother.

That before his Journey he leaves her mad, is I think pretty plain, from pag. 28.

That upon his Return he finds her in a Fit of the Mother, is manifeſt from p. 35.

How abſurd was it then for this Ignis Fatuus to take a Journey down to the central Earth, for no other Purpoſe than to give her the Spleen, whom he left and found in the Height of it? And why does this impertinent Devil, who ſees this, give himſelf the Trouble which he takes in the following Lines:

Now, pray, what were the Furies enclos'd in this Bag? Why we were told what they were a little higher, viz. the Force of female Lungs, and Bedlam Paſſions, and the War of Tongues. Now could Belinda have more of thoſe than ſhe had before the Gnome took his Journey?

And as for the Bottle, that ſeems like Trinca. lo's, rather to comfort her, than to ferment her more. For let us but conſider the Condi⯑tion in which Umbriel found her upon his Return;

That is to ſay, ſhe was ſtark mad.

Now let us compare this Condition with that in which ſhe appears after ſhe has a Dram of the Bottle?

Now, pray, what is the Conſequence? Why Be⯑linda of a ſudden comes to herſelf, holds up [43] her Head, and is calm enough to make Re⯑flections.

The next Thing I ſhall take notice of, is the Equipage of Spleen, and this Author's giving her two Handmaids, the one of which ought rather to be her Mother than her Maid, and the other can have nothing at all to do with her.

Here the Author, with a great deal of Judg⯑ment makes a Univerſal ſubordinate to a Par⯑ticular. Ill-Nature may with ſome Colour be ſaid to be the Mother of Spleen, but ſhe can never be call'd her Maid, without ſhocking common Senſe. The Nature of a Man muſt be coeval to the Man, and muſt far precede any Thing that the World calls Spleen in him. But let us take a View of her other Hand⯑maid, pag. 32.

Now Affectation can never have any Thing to do with Spleen. Spleen is the Mother of Paſſion, which is Nature; Affectation is the Child of Tranquillity, and for the moſt part is nothing but counterfeit Paſſion. Now he, who has violent Paſſions of his own, is hardly [44] at leiſure to counterfeit thoſe which are foreign to him; and therefore it has been often ſeen, that when too much Felicity has made a Fop affected, Spleen and Adverſity have brought him back to Nature.

I will not take notice of the various Er⯑rors in the Deſcription of what he calls the Palace of Spleen. I ſhall content myſelf with the Mention of one of them, which may not improperly be call'd the impoſſible Transfor⯑mation.

Now, Sir, I appeal to you and your Friends, if ever there was ſuch execrable Stuff, ſuch la⯑mentable, ſuch deplorable Pleaſantry! What ſays Horace?

Good Senſe is the ſole Foundation of good Wri⯑ting. And, according to him, Boileau;

[45] Good Senſe is the only Foundation both of Pleaſantry and Sublimity: But that which is out of Truth, is certainly out of Nature and Good Senſe. Now was ever any Thing more out of Truth than the foregoing Deſcription? Inſtead of giving Spleen a Power to bring me⯑lancholy Deluſions upon Mortals, and to cheat them with falſe Appearances, this Author gives her the Power really to transform Bodies, and makes Umbriel the Gnome, who, as a Spi⯑rit, is ſuppos'd to ſee Things as they are, actually and really to behold that extravagant Tranſ⯑formation. But ſo much for the Sentiments of the fourth Canto.

As the fifth is very ſhort, and very inſipid, and as your humble Servant is very much tir'd, I ſhall make but two Obſervations upon it.

In the Beginning of it there is a rampant Scuffle, which I ſuppoſe our Author took from the Rankneſs of a Buttock-Ball, ſo little is it becoming of Perſons of Condition.

[46] The latter Part is ſomething odd in the Mouth of the Tranſlator of Homer, who ought to know, that both Mars and Venus had been wounded by Diomedes. But if no common Weapons are found in the Hands of theſe Combatants, pray what Weapons are they which make the Silks to ruſtle, and the Whale⯑bones to crack? But let us conſider what follows:

Now, Sir, who ſays that this Paſſage is not very juſtly applied to a Catterwauling? But the latter Part of it is not taken from Homer, but from his moſt impertinent Imitator Mon⯑ſieur De la Motte, and neither the one nor the other Trifler ſeem to have known any thing in this Paſſage, of the Solemnity, and the dreadful Majeſty of Homer.

In the Beginning of the next Page the fol⯑lowing Lines are full of miſerable Pleaſantry:

So that here we have a real Combat and a metaphorical dying. Now is not that, Sir, very ludicrous? What, did he fight, or make Love, as Profeſſors read, or as Popes fulmi⯑nate ex Cathedrâ? I cannot imagine how he could do that, unleſs he had got Belinda or Thaleſtris upon his Lap.

Thus, Sir, have I gone thro' ſeveral of the Sentiments upon the Rape, which are either trifling, or falſe. But there are a great many Lines, which have no Sentiment at all in them, that is, no reaſonable Meaning. Such are the Puns which are every where ſpread throughout it. Puns bear the ſame Propor⯑tion to Thought, that Bubbles hold to Bodies, and may juſtly be compared to thoſe gaudy Bladders which Children make with Soap; which, tho' they pleaſe their weak Capacities with a momentary Glittering, yet are but juſt beheld, and vaniſh into Air. Of this Nature is that Pun in the 5th Canto, p. 44.

That is to ſay, He wiſh'd for nothing more than to fight with her, becauſe he deſired no⯑thing more than to lie with her. Now what ſenſible Meaning can this have, unleſs he takes her for a Ruſſian, who is to grow paſ⯑ſionately fond of him by the extraordinary Gallantry of a luſty Baſtinado? Such like⯑wiſe is that Quibble in the following Page:

Now we heard nothing before of the Baron's lying low. All that we heard is, that by a dextrous Toſs of this modeſt Virgin, his No⯑ſtrils were fill'd with Snuff. So that he ſeems here to ſay the ſame thing to her, that Nykin ſays to Cocky in the Old Batchelor; I have it in my Head, but you will have it in another Place. What follows ſeems to be very ex⯑traordinary:

[33] Now, Sir, who ever heard of a dead Man that burnt in Cupid's Flames?

Of the ſame Nature are thoſe numerous Banters in Rhyme, which are to be found throughout this Poem, which are ſo uniform, and ſo much of a piece, that one would ſwear the Author were giving a Receipt for dry Joking: For by placing ſomething important in the Beginning of a Period, and making ſomething very trifling follow it, he ſeems to take pains to bring ſomething into a Conjun⯑ction Copulative with nothing, in order to be⯑get nothing. Of this there are divers Inſtances in Ariel's Speech in the 2d Canto;

Which, by the way, I ſuppoſe is deſign'd as a bitter Bob for the Predeſtinarians. Raillery apart, we pretend not to deny, that the very minuteſt Events are foredoom'd by eternal Pre⯑ſcience; but that Heave [...] ſhould give notice of the Death of a vile Dog, by what he calls black Omens, is a great deal too ſtrong. Hea⯑ven could do no more for Caeſar himſelf, the [34] very Top of the human Creation, and the Fore⯑moſt Man of the Univerſe.

But now, Sir, give me leave to ask you one Queſtion: Is Ariel in Jeſt or in Earneſt, in haranguing the Spirits at this rate? Is he in Earneſt? Why then even Robin Goodfellow himſelf is not a more ſenſeleſs inſignificant Hobgoblin. Is he in Jeſt? Why then all this is a very grand Impertinence, ſince it does not ſo much as aim at any thing: For how can the Spirits be any ways influenced by theſe dry Jokes of their Leader?

Of the ſame Stamp and the ſame Contri⯑vance are theſe Lines in the Beginning of the 3d Canto:

As I ſaid above, Sir, is not here a Receipt for dry Joking? and can any thing be more eaſy than to be a Wit at this rate?

But ſo much for the Sentiments in this Rape of the Lock; I ſhould now come to the Expreſſion. But I have already tranſgreſs'd the Bounds I preſcribed to myſelf, and 'tis Time to take Pity of myſelf and you. I am, Sir,

LETTER VII.

THO' I am heartily tired with what I have already ſent you, and am really aſhamed of having paſs'd a Week in thinking on ſuch an empty jingling Trifle as the Rape of the Lock, a wretched Rhapſody, writ for the Amuſement of Boys, and Men like Boys; and tho' I am both very much indiſpoſed at preſent, and very buſy, yet ſince I have re⯑ceived your Commands to ſend you ſome Re⯑marks upon the Expreſſions in that Bawble, in order to compleat the Converſion of Mrs. S [...]; I will, in Obedience to thoſe Com⯑mands, do myſelf a little more Violence, and will do it in as ſhort a Time, and as ſmall a Compaſs as I can; for I will confine myſelf to the firſt twelve Lines, that by the numerous Faults which will be ſeen in them, any one to whom you may happen to ſhew this Letter, may be able to judge of the reſt.

This Rhapſody begins with Abſurdity;

[36] The two firſt of theſe Lines, and the Begin⯑ning of the third, are out of all Grammatical Conſtruction: For here the Verb Active ſing has no Accuſative Caſe depending on it; as the Nominative Caſe is without a Verb in the Be⯑ginning of the Prologue to Cato, which Pro⯑logue was writ by the ſame little whimſical Gentleman.

The Word Muſe is a mere Expletive, and can have nothing to do here, ſince 'tis Belinda only that is to inſpire him.

There are no leſs than ſix Faults in the ſix Lines which he calls his Invocation:

Now all this, if it were not for the Rhyme, would appear, even to Fools as well as to Men of Senſe, the pooreſt and moſt contemptible Stuff that ever laid the gentle Reader aſleep. I would fain know what the Word Goddeſs in the firſt Line [...] the Muſe, or Belinda. Goddeſs, by the uſual Signification of the Word, relates to Muſe, but according to Grammar and Conſtruction, it relates to Belinda, becauſe ſhe was mention'd laſt, and ſhe is the inſpiring Perſon. The Word compel in the firſt Line likewiſe is a Botch for the ſake of the Rhyme, the Word that ſhould naturally have been uſed [37] was either induce or provoke. The Word com⯑pel ſuppoſes the Baron to be a Beaſt, and not a free Agent. Now, Sir, what a pretty Senſe theſe two firſt Lines make:

That is, what could force a well-bred Man to be damnably rude, and to ſhew himſelf an er⯑rant Clown and a Brute? As for the Terms gentle Belle, they are too affected, too weak, and too low, and by no means come up to what is ſaid to Belinda in the very next Page by Ariel the Sylph:

For Belle and Beau, as we have made them, as it were, Engliſh Subſtantives, do not ſignify ſo much as Beautiful, tho' as they are French Adjectives they have that Signification. No Man when he calls another Beau, means, that that other is handſome, but only that he takes a great deal of Poppiſh Care about his Dreſs, and gives himſelf a great many fantaſtick Airs, in order to pleaſe ſuperficial People, and ren⯑der himſelf ridiculous to Men of Senſe. Belle has much the ſame Signification, and accord⯑ing to the preſent Uſe and Acceptation of the Word, no more ſignifies a beautiful Woman than Coquette does, but only one that takes a great deal of fruitleſs Pains to make herſelf [38] more agreeable than God and Nature have made her. But let us go on to the next Couplet:

The Cauſe was, becauſe ſhe did not like him; a ſtrange Cauſe indeed, and which required a great deal of Sagacity to find it out. But to what Purpoſe is the Word reject? Belinda granted him every thing that he ask'd of her. He deſired to wait upon her to Hampton⯑Court, and ſhe granted it. He deſired her to make one at Ombre, and ſhe complied with that Requeſt likewiſe. If ſhe granted no more, it was becauſe he ask'd no more: For, if we may believe herſelf, by what ſhe ſays at the Beginning of the fourth Canto, ſhe would have refuſed him nothing unleſs it was her favou⯑rite Lock:

For ſhe, who ſeems inclin'd to ſacrifice her Mo⯑deſty to her Vanity, would, in all likelihood, have ſacrificed it to her Pleaſure. In ſhort, the Baron is ſo far from making Love in this Rhapſody, that he plainly ſhews, by the rude Affront which he puts upon Belinda, that he expected no particular Favour from her. And indeed this Party of Pleaſure at Hampton-Court ſeems to me to look more like Catterwauling, than the Behaviour of Perſons who went thither [39] with any amorous Deſign. But let us proceed to the next Couplet:

Yes, moſt certainly does it; and if this little Gentleman had not had a Head more ſoft than Belinda's Boſom, he could never have been ca⯑pable of asking ſo ſimple a Queſtion. The ſofter Sex are much more ſubject to violent Paſſions than Men. Virgil ſhewed a Softneſs in Dido, which this little Gentleman is utterly incapable of comprehending; a Softneſs which obliged a Sovereign Queen, whoſe Underſtand⯑ing was equal to her Supreme Power, or to her Greatneſs of Mind, to grant the laſt Favour to the Trojan Hero, and yet that Softneſs was immediately ſucceeded by a Rage, to whoſe Force, and whoſe noble Enthuſiaſm, this little Creature, who is as diminutive an Author as he is an Animal, is as utterly incapable of rai⯑ſing himſelf, as an earthly Vapour is of aſcend⯑ing to Heaven. But tho' nothing is more plain than that Rage may dwell in ſofteſt Boſoms, yet had it no more to do here than reject, and indeed had the leſs to do here becauſe of reject: For cannot a Lady deny a Gentleman who makes a civil Requeſt to her, but ſhe muſt ſall immediately into as raving a Fit, as ſhe could have done, if he had extorted the Favour from her. Reject ſhews Contempt rather than Rage: It ſhews that ſhe did not eſteem the Baron enough to be at all angry with him. But let us come to the ſecond Line of the Couplet:

Yes certainly, daring Souls dwell often in little Men, and for that very Reaſon, becauſe they are little Men. Did he never hear of what Statius ſays of little Tydeus:

I myſelf know a little Monſter, who, I dare venture to propheſy, will one Day ſhew as daring a Soul as a mad Indian who runs a muck. But what Occaſion is there for daring Souls here? The Baron ſhews a good deal of Bru⯑tality, and a good deal of Perfidy, but no Daring. He ſhew'd a great deal of Courage indeed, in coming treacherouſly behind a Lady and cutting off her favourite Lock!

But all this Piece, is, like Windſor Foreſt, or the Temple of Fame, below Criticiſm; and there⯑fore I take my Leave of you. It would be un⯑reaſonable to expect that you ſhould read Re⯑marks with Pleaſure which I write with Pain; Remarks which may be made by the moſt ordi⯑nary Reader, without any Penetration or any Sagacity. Beſides, I have given a ſufficient Sample to enable Mrs. S [...] to judge of the reſt. For as a Lion is known by his Claws, an Aſs is known by his Ears.