L U 
Jias been difputed by thofe critics who, from the examples 
of Homer and Virgil, have maintained that machinery, or 
the intervention of fuperjiatural agency, is eflential to that 
fpecies of compofition. Whatever it be entitled, it cer¬ 
tainly ranks among the capital productions of the Latin 
mufe; and will be read and admired as long as the lan¬ 
guage in which it is written fhall endure. It is, indeed, 
not without great faults. Arch as harlhnefs and obfcurity 
of ltyle, extravagant defcriptions, turgid metaphors, and 
bombaftic fentiments. But thefe are redeemed by a itrain 
of moral fublimity fuperior to that of any other ancient, 
by a noble fpirit of freedom, and by frequent inftances of 
genuine poetry, both in the thoughts and expreffions. 
Hence he has had admirers who have placed him at the 
very head of epic poets ; while others have treated him 
with great feverity, and degraded him to the clafs of rhe¬ 
toricians and declaimers; for Quintilian, by a frivolous dif- 
tinftion, difputes his title to be clalfed among the poets 5 
and Scaliger fays, with a brutality of language difgraceful 
only to himfelf, that he feems rather to bark than to fmg. 
But thefe infults may appear amply compenfated, when 
we remember that, in the moll polilhed nations of modern 
Europe, the moll elevated and poetic fpirits have been his 
warmed admirers ; that in France he was idolized by Cor¬ 
neille, and in England tranllated by Rowe. The fevertfl 
cenfures on Lucan have proceeded from thofe who have 
unfairly compared his language to that of Virgil. But how 
unjuft and abfurd is fuch a comparifon! it is comparing 
an uneven block of porphyry, taken rough from the quarry, 
to the moll beautiful fuperficies of polilhed marble. How 
differently lliould we think of Virgil as a poet, if we poA 
felled only the verfes which he wrote at that period of 
life when Lucan compofed his Pharfalia! In the difpo- 
fition of his fubjeft, in the propriety and elegance of dic¬ 
tion, he is undoubtedly far inferior to Virgil: but if we 
attend to the bold originality of his defign, and to the 
vigour of his fentiments ; if we confider the Pharfalia as 
the rapid and uncorrefted Iketch of a young poet, exe¬ 
cuted in an age when the fpirit of his countrymen wgs 
broken, and their tafte in literature corrupted; it may 
juIlly beelteemed as one of the moll noble and molt won¬ 
derful productions of the human mind. 
The fubjett of the Pharfalia prefents to us the moft 
dreadful picture of the miferies of civil war. It incul¬ 
cates the lame moral as the Iliad ; but in another point of 
view, and under a different form. It is more particularly 
intended to convey this ul'eful leffon to the people, that 
in domeftic contentions they are only the inftruments of 
the great; for the gratification of whofe ambition they 
madly (bed their blood, and forge their own fetters. But 
the fubjeft has two defefts. Civil wars, efpecially when 
fo fierce and violent as thofe of the Romans, prelent ob- 
jefts too Ihocking for the epopcea, and give odious and 
dilgulting views of human nature. Gallant and honour¬ 
able achievements are mugh more proper themes for the 
epic mufe. But the genius of Lucan feemed to delight 
in feenes of blood. Not content with thofe which his 
plan abundantly furnilhed, he introduces, by way of epi- 
fiode, a long detail of the proferiptions of Marius and 
Sy 11 a, which prefent all the forms of ingenious and fyfte- 
matic cruelty. The other defeft of the fubjeft is, that it 
is too near the times in which the poet lived. This is a 
circumftance always unfortunate for a poet, as it in a 
great meafure deprives him of the afliltance of fiction and 
imagery, which add a degree of fplendour, as well as 
amulement, to his work. Lucan appears to have fub- 
mitted to this difadvantage of the fubjeft ; with what 
propriety, has been often confidered doubtful. That he 
himfelf thought it fufceptible of fuch embellifhment is 
evident, from the circumltance of his having once, though 
only once, employed it. It is true that the fables of the 
Gdyffey would ill agree with the ferious conventions of 
Cato and Brutus; but it was poffible for a man of genius 
and talte to feleft a fpecies of machinery more fuitable to 
the fubjeft. The gods and the Romans might have been 
c A N. 7^5 
made to aft together in the fame flage, as well ns the gods 
and the heroes of Homer. Deftiny itfelf might have in¬ 
terfered in fo great a quarrel, during which the fafety and 
repofe of the world hung in trembling fufpenfe. That 
beautiful nftion, unfortunately the only one that is to be 
found in the Pharfalia, of the appearance to Cxfar of his 
weeping country, on the borders of the Rubicon, l'uffi- 
ciently proves what affiltance Lucan might have derived 
from fable, without injuring the intereft of his fubjeft, or 
the dignity of hiftory. 
The characters in the Pharfalia are not numerous. There 
are but three ditlinftly marked, thofe of Pompey, Cato, 
and Csefar; but it is in the expolition of thefe different: 
characters, in the contrail of their virtues and their vices, 
that the excellence of Lucan peculiarly difplays itfelfV 
They are drawn with fpirit and energy. Pompey is the 
nominal hero of the poem ; but, whether confidered as 
delineated by the pen of hiftory, or painted by the imagi¬ 
nation of the poet, he appears little deferving of this dif- 
tinftion. We leldom dilcoverin him either magnanimity 
in fentiment, or bravery in aftion. He is rail), arrogant* 
and w'eak. Corrupted by flattery, enervated by profperity, 
he feems contentedly to repofe under the (hade of a mighty 
name. Slat magni nominis umbra. When oppofed to the 
fpirit and perfeverance of Caefar, he is eclipfed by the fu¬ 
perior abilities of his rival. He is rafh in his defigns, but 
cowardly in the execution ; and, in the very crilis of h;S 
fate, he feems to lofe all prefence of mind, and, without 
further ltruggle, furrenders the world to Caefar. The 
fimple manners and aullere virtues of Cato, however ve¬ 
nerable in hiftory, would feem to be little adapted to 
make any forcible impreflion in an epic poem. But he is 
a favourite perfonage with Lucan, who, in the delineation 
of his character, appears to rife above himfelf. It has 
been remarked, that the moll ftriking paffages in the 
Pharfalia for beauty and energy are referred to Cato, eU 
ther in fpeeches which he is made to utter, or in defcrip¬ 
tions of his behaviour. Such are his nuptials with Mar¬ 
cia, his march over the fands of Africa, and his noble an- 
fwer to the fpeech of Labienus on the oracle of Jupiter 
Ammon. 
There are in the Pharfalia feveral very poetical and ani¬ 
mated defcriptions. But the author’s chief ftrength does 
not lie either in narration or defeription. His narration 
is often dry and harflt; his defcriptions are often too highly 
coloured, and fometimes employed -on dilagreeable ob- 
jefts. His principal merit confiits injhis fentiments, which 
are always noble and Itriking, and exprefled in that glow¬ 
ing and ardent ftyle that peculiarly diftinguilhes him* 
Lucan is the molt philofophical and the moft public- 
fpirited of the ancient poet3- He was the nephew of Se¬ 
neca, the philofopher; was.himfelf a ftoic, and the fpirit 
of that phiiofophy breathes throughout his poem. Wa 
mull oblerve, too, that he is the only ancient epic poet 
whom the fubjeft of his poesn really and deeply interelled. 
He relates no fiftion ; he was a Roman, and had felt all 
the cruel conlequences of the civil wars of Rome, and of 
that fevere defpotifm which lucceeded the lofs of liberty. 
His high and bold fpirit made him enter deeply into the 
fubjeft, and kindle, on many occafions, the moft rational- 
warmth. He abounds, too, in exclamations and apoltro- 
phes, which are always well timed, and lbpported with a 
vivacity and fire that do him the higheft: honour. 
But it is the fate of Lucan that his beauties can never 
be mentioned, without fuggefting his blemilhes. As hi* 
principal excellence is a lively and glowing genius, which 
appears fometimes in his delcriptions, and always in his 
fentiments, his great defeft in both is want of modera¬ 
tion. He carries every tiling to an extreme. He knows 
not where to flop. From an effort to aggrandile his ob¬ 
ject, he becomes tumid and unnatural; and it frequently 
happens that, where the fecond line of one of his defcrip¬ 
tions is lublime, the third, in which he intended to rife 
Hill higher, is perfeftly bombalt. Lucan .lived in an age 
when the fchools of fophifts and declahiiejs kid begun to 
x corrupt: 
