759 
POE 
fententious ftyle. No poet ever equalled him for 
harmony of numbers, and grandeur of didtion. That 
he is fometimes unequal, cannot be denied; but 
this inequality arifes, not fo much from a defedi: 
of genius, as from the fudden inflexions of ftyle in 
which he indulges, and the rapid fucceflion of images, 
fotne lefs noble than others. Nor fliould this inequality 
always be cenfured as a fault. Boileau has noticed it as 
a principal feature in the Ode : 
Son (file impetueux fouvent marche au hazard ; 
Chez elle, un beau defordre elf un eft’et de Part. 
Pindar himfelf was perfectly aware of this irregularity; 
and in his ioth Pyth. ii. he cautions his Mufe againft it; 
and, comparing her to a vefl'el at fea, he advifes her to 
caft anchor, and flop before fhe (trikes againft the rocks. 
It is evident, however, from the ftyle of this apology, 
that he Is rather complimenting his own genius, than 
acknowledging a fault. Thofe who have been too ready 
to cenfure him for the fuppofed wildnefs of his thoughts, 
extravagant digrefiions, and fudden tranfitions, have not 
fufficiently coniidered the manners and cultoms of the 
age in which the odes were written, the occafions which 
gave them birth, or the places in which they were re¬ 
cited. See Pindar, p. 456, 7, of this volume. 
A pleating euphony is not always found in Pindar; 
though in general folr, the ear is fometimes diflatisfied. 
It is impoffible, however, now' to afcertajn the proper 
accent of a language that has ceafed to exift for fo many 
ages, as to common ufe. Nor is it probable that the 
tame pronunciation prevailed in Greece, even in the beft 
times. We cannot, at prefent, trace the diftindtion 
between the .ZEolian and the Doric accents ; or what 
accent was peculiar to Pindar. The manner of pronoun¬ 
cing Greek is different in every country. Thus, as 
Heyne remarks, however difpleafing the frequent breaks 
of Pindar may be to fome, they are not fo univerfally; 
and the horrible cacophony which occurs in the 1 Pyth. 
135. trvi1 rot rw xe>, though fufficiently annoying to the 
delicacy of one man, may not difturb the ear of another. 
The fentiments of this great poet are always ftriking 
and juft. Many paflages might be cited, which contain 
maxims of the foundeft morality. He is remarkable, too, 
for the pious veneration with which he fpeaks of the 
deities and religious worfnip of his country. On this 
point he is much fuperior to the other poets of Greece, 
Homer not excepted, who is juftly charged with fo many 
unworthy, not to fay indecent, representations of the 
powers of heaven. Thus the produdfions of Pindar are 
recommended for their ufefulnefs, ?s well as admired for 
their excellence. If we cannot copy the beauties of his 
fancy, we may improve by the ftrength of his wifdom, 
and the warmth of a fincere devotion. The eftimation 
he was held in by his countrymen was fo great, that the 
friends of Phineas, a vidfor in the Nemtean games, gave 
him 3000 drachms to compofe an Ode on the occafion. 
They hefitated, and propofed at firft to build to their 
friend a ftatue of brafs; but a fecond confideration in- 
ftrudfed them that the works of the architect are lading, 
thofe of the poet eternal. 
Anacreon, the bard of Teios, was a gay and elegant 
voluptuary, who perfected the fprightlyand amatory ode. 
His works were probably numerous; but his Odes only 
remain. They (how- their creator’s character. They 
feem the carelefs and fpontaneous effuftons of a mind, 
indolent and voluptuous, which had the'happy talent of 
expreffing, with eafe and fenlibility, the various fen- 
fations that affedted it. They are tender and elegant; 
ar.d there is, in general, a delicacy in his flattery, and 
in the praife of the beauties whom he celebrates, which 
is rarely obfervable in any other ancient poet. In this he 
excels Horace ; and Catullus and Aufonius link infi¬ 
nitely below him. In fome, it muft be confeffed, that 
the warmth of his ideas hurries him into a freedom of 
defcnption bordering on indecency ; but the indecency 
T R Y. 
is in the allufions, and never in the words. The great 
merit of Anacreon is fimplicity. His Odes are not the 
laboured produdfions of art, but the fpontaneous 
eft’ufions of a lively old man, to whom poetry was an 
amufement. This peculiar feature, which no other 
ancient poffeffes in fo eminent a degree, feldom fails to 
conciliate the love and admiration of his readers, who 
Sympathize even in his exceffes. His poetic invention is 
difplayed in thofe allegorical fidtions which have fince 
been fo frequently imitated. Many, too, have endea¬ 
voured to imitate the happy facility of his manner, 
and that amiable-negligence which defies all comparifon; 
bur, as far as we have Teen, unfuccefsfully. 
Of the Greek Drama .—The ftep from the minftrel’s 
fong to the adfor’s recitation feemsfo eafy, that one would 
adiually infer that the rudeft ages had their dramas. Hif- 
tory, however, by no means fupports this inference. The 
records of the Egyptians make no mention of it, nor did 
it exift in Greece or Rome until thofe nations had af- 
fumed a high degree of civilization. The Perfians and 
Arabians, though poetical, had no adting drama. During 
the darknefs of the middle ages, the drama was only em¬ 
ployed in the talk of embellishing allegorical or fcriptural 
dodtrines; and in many parts even this employment was 
denied. But there are neverthelefs reafons for fuppofing 
that thebarbarian’s life is not unfavourable to fcenic efforts; 
for we find that the inhabitants of fome of the iflands in 
the Pacific Ocean, though perfedtly unacquainted with 
the arts of civil life, are fond of the reprefentation of rude 
dramas, fo conftrudted as to pourtray, in ridiculous co¬ 
lours, the more ftriking events of life. That remarkable 
race the Hindoos had (as has been noticed in a preceding 
part of this work) a very beautiful fpecies of drama ante¬ 
cedent to the Chriftian era. But, omitting thofe flight 
beginnings, we may fairly accord to the Athenians the 
origin of a regular adling drama ; and, even if this their 
claim fliould be oppugned, their advancement towards its 
perfedtion cannot be denied. They are truly the fatHers 
of this art. Its origin among them was apparently the 
alternate addrefs of the Bacchanals in the facred hymns 
in honour of the god of wine ; and it is faid that, on fome 
occafions, Thefpis, obferving the eftedt of this kind of dia¬ 
logue carried on between the chorus and one of the fing¬ 
ers, obtained the hint of forming a dramatic fcene. This 
author and Suzarion', the former attaching himfelf to fe- 
rious hiftories, the latter to quizzes on the manners of 
the age ; each began adling in the country, where they 
received fome encouragement; and then came to Athens, 
where they met with ftill more, though oppofed by Solon. 
See the arricle Playhouse, p. 646 of this volume. 
The great authors of the Grecian tragedy were .-Tfchylus, 
Sophocles, and Euripides. By each of thefe the great 
paffionsof ourkind were pourtrayed with a force and fide¬ 
lity never perhaps equalled from their time until that of 
Shakefpeare. But they were far from perfedtion. The 
philofophy of their time cramped the ftrength of their 
genius. Their powers in the fublime were circumfcribed 
by the notion of deftiny. The idea that a prefixed agency 
difpofes of all men’s adtions,fpite of every endeavour to the 
contrary, is of that dreadful nature, that, when the mind 
is once impreffed with it, all druggies for virtue or right 
feem like the play of children, uielefs and abfurd. The 
power of'free-will being thus denied, no pidlure of the 
true gre 3 tnefs of our mind could be held forth, no moral 
dedudtions could be made. Sublime pidtures were indeed 
drawn of the Jlruggles of man againft fate; but how the heart 
fickens at the contemplation of that ftruggle which, from 
its very nature, cannot avail. While thus the Greek trage- 
dilts loft a great hold on the fublime feelings of human 
nature by their philofophical blindnefs to the exiftence 
of free-will, they loft an equally ftrong hold on our affec¬ 
tion for the beautiful by their utter ignorance of the paf- 
fion of love. Throughout every Greek and Roman author, 
woman is a thing of luft. The pleafure we derive from 
the enjoyment of her perfon may be varioufty mixed, and 
a mental 
