771 
POE 
Statius. His chara&ers are ftately, and his fentiments 
are juft and pleafing. His defcriptions are fometimes 
bold, and the images are poetical; but the expreftion, the 
colouring, is weak, and often fpiritlefs. He poflefled many 
of the qualifications neceffary to form a poet; but, in 
aiming at the corredtnefs of Virgil, he is cold and decla¬ 
matory ; his figures are without life, and his ftyle vapid 
and flat. 
The Argonautica, which Apollonius had written, 
ferved Valerius Flaccus as a narrative to be told in Latin 
verfe. He accordingly wrote a poem of the fame name, in 
which he improved on his original, though he had many 
faults. In the firft place, unmindful of Horace, (Ars Poet, 
1 36.) he begins with high and pretending language, thus : 
Phoebe mone fi Cumeae mihi confcia vatis 
Stat cafta cortina domo, fi laurea digna 
Fronte viret. Tuque o pelagi cui major aperti 
Fama, Caledonius portquam tua carbafa vexit 
Oceanus, Phrygios prius indignatus lalus, 
Eripe me popuiis & habenti nubila terras, 
Sanfte pater, veterumque fave veneranda cacanenti 
Fa£ta viram, verfani proles fua pandit Idumen, 
Namque poteft Solymo nigrantem pulvere fratrem 
Spargentemque faces, & in omni turre fuentem. 
But, as may be expebled, this magnificent ftyle is ill pre- 
ferved throughout the poem; and, whenever Flaccus has 
fo reftrained his native genius as to follow the plan, and 
aimoft the language, of Apollonius, he is tame and unin- 
terefting. Hisdidtion is pure, though occafionally rugged. 
He abounds more in poetical expreftions, and in the nar¬ 
rative parts is lets profaic, than Statius and Silius. For 
the knowledge of antiquity difplayed in the poem, he is 
unqueftionably indebted to the Greek. There is fome 
appearance of invention ; and an affeftation of the mar¬ 
vellous runs through the whole. The manners are deli¬ 
neated with propriety, and the charadiers are various and 
well difcriminated. They are, it nuift be confefled, little 
remarkable either for their morality or civility. His 
Medea is good ; her ftruggles between love, duty, and 
remorfe, render her an interefting charadlgr, and fhe 
rarely excites that indignation which fhe infpires in the 
drama. The defcriptions are numerous and pleafing, and 
the fimiles in general are natural and appropriate. The 
iolemn imprecation of Aicimedis againft Pelias, the de- 
fcription of the two gates, one leading to Tartarus, the 
other to Elyfium, of Fame in the fecond book, the love 
of Hypfipyle for Jafon, and the feaft of the Argonauts, are 
among the beft paflages of the poem. The admirers of 
Flaccus think that he wanted neither genius nor diligence 
to render the Argonautica an excellent poem, had he not 
been prevented by a premature death. It abruptly 
breaks oft in the middle of the eighth book, and it ft ill 
remains uncertain whether be lived to complete his defign. 
The occafional poems of Claudian are numerous, con- 
filling of panegyrics, inveflives or fatires, epiftles, and 
epigrams. He had alio compiled in Greek the Antiqui¬ 
ties of Tarlus, Anazarbus, Berytus, Nice, &c. But the 
work which gives him a place among the heroic poets, is 
t he Rape of Proferpine, in four books-; the poem on which 
he intended to found his reputation, and which, as he 
hbr.felf infinuates, being a work of confiderable labour and 
difficulty, he did not begin till he had tried his genius in the 
number and variety of his minor compofitions. The ftory 
upon which it is founded is one of the moft celebrated in 
the ancient mythology, but is too v>eli known to 
require infertion here. A principal defect in this work 
is, that n begins too high, and the duration of the action 
is unreafonably prolonged. The adlion of the Rape is 
entirely finiflied in the books now extant; fo that what 
followed, if indeed Claudian lived to compofemore than 
we poflefs, could not be properly faid to belong to it, any 
■more than the .dEneid, though in fa ft a continuation in 
part of the fame ftory which formed thefubjedl of Homer, 
can be faid to belong to the Iliad. Greater fimplicity in 
T R Y. 
the aftion, and a greater variety of human aftors, con¬ 
tra fting with the deities of heaven and hell, would alfo 
have rendered the poem more natural and pleafing. But 
thegeniusof Claudian was of a high and lofty'defcription, 
and feemed to difdain the common incidents and language 
of human nature. His fentiments are always dignified, 
and his didtion is beyond meafure pompous, and furpafiing 
even Flaccus in the fplendour of his opening; he thus 
exclaims: 
Audaci promere cantu 
Mens congefta jubet. Greftus removete, profani! 
J&m furor humanos noftro de peftore fenfus 
Expulit, et totum fpirant proecordia Phcebum. 
Such enthufiaftic flights can be tolerated only in the 
Ode, or in any other fimilar piece fufficiently fhort to 
enable the poet to preferve the fame fervour throughout 
the whole. But in a poem of any length, like the epic, 
they are evidently improper, as they only make the fubfe- 
quent and unavoidable fall of the poet the more glaring 
and oftenfive. 
No man ever poflefled more of true poetic genius than 
Claudian ; and few men of genius ever poflefled fo little 
judgment. His flights are extravagant, but they are 
beautiful. He has a boldnefs in the ufe of figures, which 
aftonilhes and confounds the reader ; but their foundation 
may aimoft always be found in truth, though they are 
ftretched too far in the execution. He is more florid, 
though lefs affedted, than Statius. Like him, he is often 
tumid and inflated without any apparent caufe; but 
what in Statius was the efFedt of art, is in Claudian excefs 
of imagination. The moft lively inltances of this redun¬ 
dancy of fancy occur in the beginning of the third book, 
where Jupiter is deferibed as calling a council of the 
gods, in the nuptials of Pluto and Proferpine in the fecond, 
and the reprefentation of Mount iEtna. Of his defcrip¬ 
tions, the general fault is, that they are too minute, and 
involve too many circumftances. He is alfo accufed of 
deviating into philofophical, ingenious, and learned, di- 
greflions, which too frequently lead him from the purpofe 
of jiis ftory. But, upon the whole, the beauties of his 
poem far exceed its defeats. 
The famous work of Lucretius is an example of an 
original attempt at a truly philofophical poem. The 
tenets which its author propofed to inculcate, were thofe 
of Epicurus; and confided in the firft place of an idea, 
that chance arranged matter in its various forms, and lb 
caufed the w'orld ; and that the eftablifhment of an abfo- 
lute and infinite exiftence of matter precluded the ne- 
ceffity of fuppofing an abfolute and infinite Creator. 
The mind which commits this grofs error mull, however, 
be fo much roufed by the fleps that it takes to the requi- 
fite boldnefs, that moral and political precepts are otter, 
readily elicited from it ; and fo it was with Lucretius. 
Voltaire gloats on the fublimity of our author’s fenti¬ 
ments ; but ftill Lucretius never was, nor ever will be, 
a general favourite. Science altogether is tedious in 
poetry, if too abundant ; ftill more fo if that fcience be er¬ 
roneous, and oppofed to the good feelings of our nature. 
The poem, “ The Nature of Things,” opens with a 
beautiful allegory. The author (borrowingan idea from 
Hefiod) perfonifies, under the name of Venus, the gene¬ 
rative power which perpetuates animal and vegetable life 
through the world ; and thus finely addrefles her : 
Hineadum genetrix, hominum divfimque voluptas, 
Alma Venus : cceli fubter labentia figna 
Quae mare navigerum, qua; terras frugiferenteis 
Concelebras ; per te quoniam genus omne animantum 
Concipitur, vifitque exortum lumina fobs ; 
Te, Dea, te fugiunt venti, te nubila cceli 
Adventumque tuum ; tibi rident asquora ponti; 
Placatumque nitet diffufo lumine ccelum. 
• * * * * * * * # 
Quae quoniam rerum naturam Cola gubernas 
Nec fine te quicquam dias in luminus oras 
Exoritur; 
