« PreviousContinue »
appears by the names in use. Thus Monkey, “ which, the Etymologists tell us, comes from 6 monkin, monikin, homunculus. Baboon,
from Babe, the termination denoting adäition and “ increment, a large Babe. Mantygre speaks its
original. And when they have brought their fir" names with them from their native country, as “ Ape, the common people have as it were cbri
stened them by the addition of Jack-an-Ape.” Mr. W.
Mantygre speaks its original ! This poor critic Speaks bis original in every note be writes, especially if left to bimself. Mantiger is the English pronunciation of Mantichora, Mavlozuqas. But not to be grave~The other is on a pasage in King Lear, AET I. " Regan. That I profess
Myself an enemy to all other joys, " Which the most precious square of sense porelles. '" which the most precious square of sense polelles.] « By the square of sense, we are, bere, to under
stand the four nobler senses, viz. the sight, hear
ing, taste and smell. For a young Lady could " not, with decency, infinuate that she knew of any
pleafures which the fifth afforded. This is imagined and expressed with great PROPRIETY and
But the Oxford editor, for square " reads fpirit.” Mr. W.
I cannot belp bere pausing a little, and refleeting on the strange notes, which I have been transcribing.
:-Yet this Critic, after the utmost acrimony of stile against Mr. Tbeobald and Sir Thomas Hanmer, ibus concludes, “ * They separately popefled those 66 two qualities which, more than any other, have " contributed to bring the Art of Criticism into dif“ repute, DULNESS OF APPREHENSION, and ex
TRAVAGANCE OF CONJECTURE."
I bave spoken very fully of what has contributed to bring the art of criticism into disrepute ; but the want of Scholarship is the original of all. And ; I could wish our Critic, among some few other obfervations, bad not thought the following absolutely below his serious notice :
“ 'Twere well if a careful and critical reader « would first form to himself some plan, when be " enters upon an author deserving a stricter in
quiry : if he would consider that originals have “ a manner always peculiar to themselves ; and not
only a manner, but a language : if be would compare one pasage with another ; for such authors
are the best interpreters of their own meaning : « and would refleet, not only what allowances may s be given for obsolete modes of speech, but what a u venerable cast this alone often gives a writer. I
Mr. W.'s preface, p. xiii.
6 omit the previous knowledge in ancient cu“ stoms and manners, in grammar and constru6 ction; the knowledge of these is presupposed; " to be caught tripping here is an ominous “ stumble at the very threshold and entrance “ upon criticism ; 'tis ignorance, which no
guess-work, no divining faculty, however « ingenious, can atone and commute for."
Had Mr. W. seriously noticed this, be would, as seriously, have laid afide all designs of commencing an editor of Shakespeare : nor would be bave gone out of bis way to sew bis readers, bow little be knows of the English, bow less of the Latin, bow nothing of the Greek languages. He has * launched forth on the immense ocean of criticism with no compass or card to direct his little skiff ; and tho' perhaps he may blind the eyes of the less-observing reader by stealing this man's observations, and by adding a little to another's ; by overrefining on this pajage, and seeking after distant and far-fetched allusions to other pasages : yet all this fig-leave covering will but the more serve to discover the nakedness of the commentator to the discerning eye of the real Critic.
2 Critical observations, &c. B. II. S. I.
IX. Whatever IX.
Whatever appearances of learning these remarks, which I have now under examination, may put on ; yet being deftitute of the thing itself, they will, from such appearances, be more despised by the real scholar. I have heard it said by Critics, That such a remark is more ingenious than true. But, for my own parl, I know nothing ingenious, but what is true. Nor can I look on the following in any other light, than as an idle dream
" From off this briar pluck a white rose with me.] This is given as the original of the two
badges of the house of York and Lancaster, " whether truly or not, is no great matter. But “ the proverbial expression of SAYING A THING “ UNDER THE ROSE, I am persuaded, came from " thence. When the nation had ranged itself into “ two great factions, under the white and red “ rose, and were perpetually plotting, and counter
plotting against one anotber, then when a matter " of fačtion was communicated by either party to “ his friend in the same quarrel, it was natural
for him to add, that he said it under the rose ; “ meaning that, as it concern'd the faction, it was
religiously to be kept secret," Mr. W. (vol. 4. pag. 465.]
This is ingenious! What pity, that it is not learned
The Rose, (as the fables say) was the Symbol of silence, and consecrated by Cupid to Harpocrates, to conceal the lewd pranks of bis mother. So common a book as Lloyd's diktionary might bave instructed bim in this.
“ Huic Harpocrali Cupido " Veneris fil. parentis fua rofam dedit in munus, « ut scilicet fi quid licentius dictum, vel a&tum
fit in « convivio, sciant tacenda ese omnia. Atque idcirco “ veteres ad finem convivii sub rosa, Anglicè “ under the role, tranfa&ta esse omnia ante digref
sum contestabantur ; cujus forme vis eadem esset, « atque iβα, Μισώ μνήμονα συμπόταν. Ρrobant « hanc rem verfus qui reperiuntur in marmore : “ Eft rosa flos Veneris, cujus quo furta laterent
Harpocráti matris dona dicavit Amor. « Inde rosam mensis hofpes suspendit amicis,
66 Convivæ ut fub eâ dicta tacenda sciant."
BUT there is scarcely a page, that does not furniso us with instances of this over-refining bumour. 'Tis this, together with a love of paradoxes, that generally misleads him from that plain road, to which plain fenfe would direet every reader. Woo, even of a common understanding, can be mistaken in interpreting the following palage in Macbeth, Af I. where the Captain is giving an account of the Battle ?