Produced by Distributed Proofreaders
Q. HORATII FLACCI Epistola ad PISONES,
[Transcriber's Note: Several ineligible words were found in severallanguages throughout the text, these are marked with an asterisk.]
London: Printed for T. Cadell, in the Strand
The Rev. JOSEPH WARTQN, D.D. MASTER of WINCHESTER SCHOOL; AND TO The
Rev. THOMAS WARTON, B.D. FELLOW of TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD.
In a conversation, some months ago, I happened to mention to you theidea I had long entertained of that celebrated Epistle of Horace,commonly distinguished by the title of THE ART OF POETRY. I will not saythat you acceded to my opinion; but I flattered myself that I at leastinterested your curiosity, and engaged your attention: our discourse,however, revived an intention I had once formed, of communicating mythoughts on the subject to the Publick; an intention I had only droptfor want of leisure and inclination to attempt a translation of theEpistle, which I thought necessary to accompany the original, and myremarks on it. In the original, Horace assumes the air and stile of anaffectionate teacher, admonishing and instructing his young friends andpupils: but the following translation, together with the observationsannexed, I address to You as my Masters, from whom I look for soundinformation, a well-grounded confirmation of my hypothesis, or asolution of my doubts, and a correction of my errors.
It is almost needless to observe, that the Epistle in question has veryparticularly exercised the critical sagacity of the literary world;yet it is remarkable that, amidst the great variety of comments anddecisions on the work, it has been almost universally considered, exceptby one acute and learned writer of this country, as a loose, vague,and desultory composition; a mass of shining materials; like pearlsunstrung, valuable indeed, but not displayed to advantage.
Some have contended, with Scaliger at their head, that this pretendedArt of Poetry is totally void of art; and that the very work, in whichthe beauty and excellence of Order (ordinis virtus et Venus!)is strongly recommended, is in itself unconnected, confused, andimmethodical. The advocates for the writer have in great measureconfessed the charge, but pleaded in excuse and vindication, thefamiliarity of an epistle, and even the genius of Poetry, in which theformal divisions of a prosaick treatise on the art would have beeninsupportable. They have also denied that Horace ever intended such atreatise, or that he ever gave to this Epistle the title of the Art ofPoetry; on which title the attacks of Scaliger, and his followers, arechiefly grounded. The title, however, is confessedly as old as the ageof Quintilian; and that the work itself has a perpetual reference toPoets and Poetry, is as evident, as that it is, from beginning to end,in its manner, stile, address, and form, perfectly Epistolary.
The learned and ingenious Critick distinguished above, an early ornamentto letters, and now a worthy dignitary of the church, leaving vaincomments, and idle disputes on the title of the work, sagaciouslydirected his researches to scrutinize the work itself; properlyendeavouring to trace and investigate from the composition the end anddesign of the writer, and remembering the axiom