<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE issue SYSTEM "spectator.dtd">
<?xml-stylesheet href="spectator.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<?cocoon-process type="xslt"?>
<issue>
<title>The Spectator 273</title>
<header>
  <number>no. 273</number>
  <date>1712-01-12</date>
  <author>Joseph Addison</author>
  <quotation>------Notandi sunt tibi Mores.---Hor.</quotation>
  <translation>Hor. Ars Poet. ver. 156.</translation>
  <translation>Note well the manners.</translation>
  </header>
<text>
<paragraph>HAVING examined the Action of <italic>Paradise Lost,</italic> let
us in the next place consider the Actors. [This is <italic>Aristotle's</italic>
Method of considering, first the Fable, and secondly<footnote name="(1)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>] the
Manners; or, as we generally call them in <italic>English,</italic> the Fable and
the Characters.</paragraph>
<paragraph><italic>Homer</italic> has excelled all the Heroic Poets that ever
wrote, in the Multitude and Variety of his Characters. Every God
that is admitted into this Poem, acts a Part which would have been
suitable to no other Deity. His Princes are as much distinguished
by their Manners, as by their Dominions; and even those among them,
whose Characters seem wholly made up of Courage, differ from one
another as to the particular kinds of Courage in which they excel.
In short, there is scarce a speech or Action in the <italic>Iliad,</italic> which
the Reader may not ascribe to the Person that speaks or acts,
without seeing his Name at the Head of it.</paragraph>
<paragraph><italic>Homer</italic> does not only
outshine all other Poets in the Variety, but also in the Novelty of
his Characters. He has introduced among his <italic>Grecian</italic> Princes a
Person who had lived thrice the of Man, and conversed with <italic>Theseus,
Hercules, Polyphemus,</italic> and the first Race of Heroes His principal
Actor is the [Son<footnote name="(2)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>]
of a Goddess, not to mention the [Offspring
of other Deities, who have<footnote name="(3)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>] likewise a Place in his Poem, and
the venerable <italic>Trojan</italic> Prince, who was the Father of so many Kings
and Heroes. There is in these several Characters of <italic>Homer,</italic> a
certain Dignity as well as Novelty, which adapts them in more
peculiar manner to the Nature of an Heroic Poem. Tho' at the same
time, to give them the greater Variety , he has described a <italic>Vulcan,</italic>
that is a Buffoon among his Gods, and a <italic>Thersites</italic> among his
Mortals.</paragraph>
<paragraph><italic>Virgil</italic> falls infinitely short of <italic>Homer</italic> in the Characters
of his Poem, both as to their Variety and Novelty. <italic>&#198;neas</italic> is indeed
a perfect Character, but as for <italic>Achates,</italic> tho' he is stiled the
Hero's Friend, he does nothing in the whole Poem which may deserve
that Title. <italic>Gyas, Mnesteus, Sergestus</italic> and <italic>Cloanthus,</italic> are all of
them Men of the same Stamp and Character.</paragraph>
<quotation>----<italic>Fortemque Gyan, fortemque Cloanthum.</italic></quotation>
<paragraph>There are indeed several very Natural
Incidents on the Part of <italic>Ascanius;</italic> as that of <italic>Dido</italic> cannot be
sufficiently admired. I do not see any thing new or particular in
<italic>Turnus. Pallas</italic> and <italic>Evander</italic> are [remote] Copies of <italic>Hector</italic> and <italic>Priam,</italic>
as <italic>Lausus</italic> and <italic>Mezentius</italic> are almost Parallels to <italic>Pallas</italic> and <italic>Evander.</italic>
The Characters of <italic>Nisus</italic> and <italic>Eurialus</italic> are beautiful, but common. [We
must not forget the Parts of <italic>Sinon, Camilla,</italic> and some few others,
which are fine Improvements on the Greek Poet.] In short, there is
neither that Variety nor Novelty in the Persons of the <italic>&#198;neid</italic> which
we meet with in those of the <italic>Iliad.</italic></paragraph>
<paragraph>If we look into the Characters
of <italic>Milton,</italic> we shall find that he has introduced all the Variety
[his Fable<footnote name="(4)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>] was capable of receiving. The whole Species of
Mankind was in two Persons at the Time to which the Subject of his
Poem is confined. We have, however, four distinct Characters in
these two Persons. We see Man and Woman m the highest Innocence and
Perfection, and in the most abject State of Guilt and Infirmity.
The two last Characters are, indeed, very, common and obvious, but
the two first are not only more magnificent, but more new<footnote name="(5)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote> than
any Characters either in <italic>Virgil</italic> or <italic>Homer;</italic> or indeed in the whole
Circle of Nature.</paragraph>
<paragraph><italic>Milton</italic> was so sensible of this Defect in the
Subject of his Poem, and of the few Characters it would afford him,
that he has brought into it two Actors of a Shadowy and Fictitious
Nature, in the Persons of <italic>Sin</italic> and <italic>Death,</italic><footnote name="(6)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>
by which means he has [wrought into<footnote name="(7)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>]
the Body of his Fable a very beautiful and
well-invented Allegory. But notwithstanding the Fineness of this
Allegory may attone for it in some measure; I cannot think that
Persons of such a Chymerical Existence are proper Actors in an Epic
Poem; because there is not that measure of Probability annexed to
them, which is requisite in Writings of this kind [, as I shall
shew more at large hereafter].</paragraph>
<paragraph><italic>Virgil</italic> has, indeed, admitted <italic>Fame</italic> as
an Actress in the <italic>&#198;neid,</italic> but the Part she acts is very short, and
none of the most admired Circumstances in that Divine Work. We find
in Mock-Heroic Poems, particularly in the <italic>Dispensary</italic> and the
<italic>Lutrin,</italic><footnote name="(8)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>
several Allegorical Persons of this Nature which are
very beautiful in those Compositions, and may, perhaps, be used as
an Argument, that the Authors of them were of Opinion, [such<footnote name="(9)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>]
Characters might have a Place in an Epic Work. For my own part, I
should be glad the Reader would think so, for the sake of the Poem
I am now examining, and must further add, that if such empty
unsubstantial Beings may be ever made use of on this Occasion,
never were any more nicely imagined, and employed in more proper
Actions, than those of which I am now speaking.</paragraph>
<paragraph>Another Principal Actor in this Poem is the great Enemy of Mankind. The Part of
<italic>Ulysses</italic> in <italic>Homer's Odyssey</italic> is very much admired by <italic>Aristotle,</italic><footnote name="(10)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>
as perplexing that Fable with very agreeable Plots and Intricacies,
not only by-the many Adventures in his Voyage, and the Subtility of
his Behaviour, but by the various Concealments and Discoveries of
his Person in several Parts of that Poem. But the Crafty Being I
have now mentioned, makes a much longer Voyage than <italic>Ulysses,</italic> puts
in practice many more Wiles and Stratagems, and hides himself under
a greater Variety of Shapes and Appearances, all of which are
severally detected, to the great Delight and Surprize of the
Reader.</paragraph>
<paragraph>We may likewise observe with how much Art the Poet has
varied several Characters of the Persons that speak to his infernal
Assembly. On the contrary, how has he represented the whole Godhead
exerting it self towards Man in its full Benevolence under the
Three-fold Distinction of a Creator, a Redeemer and a Comforter!</paragraph>
<paragraph>Nor must we omit the Person of <italic>Raphael,</italic> who amidst his Tenderness
and Friendship for Man, shews such a Dignity and Condescension in
all his Speech and Behaviour, as are suitable to a Superior Nature.
[The Angels are indeed as much diversified in <italic>Milton,</italic> and
distinguished by their proper Parts, as the Gods are in <italic>Homer</italic> or
<italic>Virgil.</italic> The Reader will find nothing ascribed to <italic>Uriel, Gabriel,
Michael,</italic> or <italic>Raphael,</italic> which is not in a particular manner suitable
to their respective Characters.]</paragraph>
<paragraph>There is another Circumstance in
the principal Actor of the <italic>Iliad</italic> and <italic>&#198;neid,</italic> which gives a
[peculiar<footnote name="(11)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>] Beauty to those two Poems, and was therefore
contrived with very great Judgment. I mean the Authors having
chosen for their Heroes, Persons who were so nearly related to the
People for whom they wrote. <italic>Achilles</italic> was a <italic>Greek,</italic> and <italic>&#198;neas</italic> the
remote Founder of <italic>Rome.</italic> By this means their Countrymen (whom they
principally proposed to themselves for their Readers) were
particularly attentive to all the Parts of their Story, and
sympathized with their Heroes in all their Adventures. A <italic>Roman</italic>
could not but rejoice in the Escapes, Successes and Victories of
<italic>&#198;neas,</italic> and be grieved at any Defeats, Misfortunes or
Disappointments that befel him; as a <italic>Greek</italic> must have had the same
Regard for <italic>Achilles.</italic> And it is plain, that each of those Poems have
lost this great Advantage, among those Readers to whom their Heroes
are as Strangers, or indifferent Persons.</paragraph>
<paragraph><italic>Milton's</italic> Poem is admirable in this respect, since it is impossible for any of its
Readers, whatever Nation, Country or People he may belong to, not
to be related to the Persons who are the principal Actors in it;
but what is still infinitely more to its Advantage, the principal
Actors in this Poem are not only our Progenitors, but our
Representatives. We have an actual Interest in every thing they do,
and no less than our utmost Happiness is concerned, and lies at
Stake in all their Behaviour.</paragraph>
<paragraph>I shall subjoin as a Corollary to the
foregoing Remark, an admirable Observation out of <italic>Aristotle,</italic> which
hath been very much misrepresented in the Quotations of some Modern
Criticks. 'If a Man of perfect and consummate Virtue falls into a
Misfortune, it raises our Pity, but not our Terror, because we do
not fear that it may be our own Case, who do not resemble the
Suffering Person.' But as that great Philosopher adds, 'If we see a
Man of Virtue mixt with Infirmities, fall into any Misfortune, it
does not only raise our Pity but our Terror; because we are afraid
that the like Misfortunes may happen to our selves, who resemble
the Character of the Suffering Person.</paragraph>
<paragraph>I shall take another
Opportunity to observe, that a Person of an absolute and consummate
Virtue should never be introduced in Tragedy, and shall only remark
in this Place, that the foregoing Observation of <italic>Aristotle</italic><footnote name="(12)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>
tho' it may be true in other Occasions, does not hold in this;
because in the present Case, though the Persons who fall into
Misfortune are of the most perfect and consummate Virtue, it is not
to be considered as what may possibly be, but what actually is our
own Case; since we are embarked with them on the same bottom, and
must be Partakers of their Happiness or Misery.</paragraph>
<paragraph>In this, and some other very few Instances, <italic>Aristotle's</italic> Rules for Epic Poetry (which
he had drawn from his Reflections upon <italic>Homer</italic>) cannot be supposed to
quadrate exactly with the Heroic Poems which have been made since
his Time; since it is plain his Rules would [still have been<footnote name="(13)" url="../january_footnotes/footnote273.xml"></footnote>]
more perfect, could he have perused the <italic>&#198;neid</italic> which was made some
hundred Years after his Death.</paragraph>
<paragraph><italic>In my next, I shall go through other
Parts of</italic> Milton's <italic>Poem; and hope that what I shall there advance,
as well as what I have already written, will not only serve as
Comment upon</italic> Milton, <italic>but upon</italic> Aristotle.</paragraph>
<paragraph>L.</paragraph>

<paragraph>1. [These are what Aristotle means by the Fable and]</paragraph>
<paragraph>2. [Offspring]</paragraph>
<paragraph>3. [Son of Aurora who has]</paragraph>
<paragraph>4. [that his Poem]</paragraph>
<paragraph>5. It was especially for the novelty of
<italic>Paradise Lost,</italic> that John Dennis had in 1704 exalted Milton above
the ancients. In putting forward a prospectus of a large projected
work upon 'the Grounds of Criticism in Poetry,' he gave as a
specimen of the character of his work, the substance of what would
be said in the beginning of the Criticism upon Milton, Here he gave
Milton supremacy on ground precisely opposite to that chosen by
Addison. He described him as one of the greatest and most daring
Genius's that has appear'd in the World, and who has made his
country a glorious present or the most lofty, but most irregular
Poem, that has been produc'd by the Mind of Man. That great Man had
a desire to give the World something like an Epick Poem; but he
resolv'd at the same time to break thro' the Rules of Aristotle.
Not that he was ignorant of them, or contemned them.. . . Milton
was the first who in the space of almost 4000 years resolv'd for
his Country's Honour and his own, to present the World with an
Original Poem; that is to say, a Poem that should have his own
thoughts, his own images, and his own spirit. In order to this he
was resolved to write a Poem, that, by virtue of its extraordinary
Subject; cannot so properly be said to be against the Rules as it
may be affirmed to be above them all. . . . We shall now shew for
what Reasons the choice of Milton's Subject; as it set him free
from the obligation which he lay under to the Poetical Laws, so it
necessarily threw him upon new Thoughts, new Images, and an
Original Spirit. In the next place we shall shew that his Thoughts,
his Images, and by consequence too, his Spirit are actually new,
and different from those of Homer and Virgil. Thirdly, we shall
shew, that besides their Newness, they have vastly the Advantage of
<italic>Homer</italic> and <italic>Virgil.</italic></paragraph>
<paragraph>6. Paradise Lost, Book II.</paragraph>
<paragraph>7. [interwoven in]</paragraph>
<paragraph>8. Sir Samuel Garth in his <italic>Dispensary,</italic> a mock-heroic poem upon a
dispute, in 1696, among doctors over the setting up of a Dispensary
in a room of the College of Physicians for relief of the sick poor,
houses the God of Sloth within the College, and outside, among
other allegories, personifies Disease as a Fury to whom the enemies
of the Dispensary offer libation; Boileau in his <italic>Lutrin,</italic> a
mock-heroic poem written in 1673 on a dispute between two chief
personages of the chapter of a church in Paris; la Sainte Chapelle,
as to the position of a pulpit, had with some minor allegory
chiefly personified Discord, and made her enter into the form of an
old precentor, very much as in Garth's poem the Fury Disease

<quotation><italic>'Shrill Colon's person took,</italic></quotation>

<quotation><italic>In morals loose; but most precise in look.'</italic></quotation></paragraph>
<paragraph>9. [that such]</paragraph>
<paragraph>10. Poetics II. &#167; 17; III. &#167; 6.</paragraph>
<paragraph>11. [particular]</paragraph>
<paragraph>12. Poetics II. &#167; I I. But Addison misquotes the
first clause. Aristotle says that when a wholly virtuous man falls
from prosperity into adversity, this is neither terrible <italic>nor
piteous,</italic> but (&#956;&#953;&#945;&#961;&#959;&#957;) shocking. Then he adds that
our pity is excited by undeserved misfortune, and our terror by
some Resemblance between the sufferer and ourselves.</paragraph>
<paragraph>13. [have been still]</paragraph>
</text>
</issue>
