As the Davideis affords only four books, though intended to 'confift of twelve, there is no opportunity for fuch criticism as Epick poems commonly fupply. The plan of the whole work is very imperfectly fhewn by the third part. The duration of an unfinished action cannot be known. Of characters either not yet introduced, or fhewn But upon few occafions, the full extent and the nice difcrimations cannot be afcertained. The fable is plainly implex, formed rather from the Odyffey than the Iliad; and many artifices of diverfification are employed, with the skill of a man acquainted with the best models. The paft is recalled by narration, and the future anticipated by vifion: but he

has

per

has been fo lavifh of his poetical art, that it is difficult to imagine how he could fill eight books more without practifing again the fame modes of difpofing his matter; and perhaps the ception of this growing incumbrance inclined him to ftop. By this abruption, pofterity loft more inftruction than delight. If the continuation of the Da videis can be miffed, it is for the learne ing that had been diffused over it, and the notes in which it had been explained.

1

Had not his characters been depraved like every other part by improper de corations, they would have deferved uncommon praife. He gives Saul both the body and mind of a hero:

His way once chofe, he forward thrust

outright,

Nor turn'd afide for danger or delight.

And the different beauties of the lofty Merah and the gentle Michol are very justly conceived and ftrongly painted.

Rymer has declared the Davideis fuperior to the Jerufalem of Taffo," which, fays he, the poet, with all his care, has not totally purged from pedantry." If by pedantry is meant that minute knowledge which is derived from particular sciences and ftudies, in oppofition to the general notions fupplied by a wide furvey of life and nature, Cowley certainly errs, by introducing pedantry far more frequently than Taffo. I know not, indeed, why they fhould be com

pared,

pared, for the refemblance of Cowley's work to Taffo's, is only that they both exhibit the agency of celestial and infernal fpirits, in which however they differ widely; for Cowley fuppofes them commonly to operate upon the mind by fuggeftion; Taffo represents them as promoting or obftructing events by external agency.

Of particular paffages that can be properly compared, I remember only the defcription of Heaven, in which the different manner of the two writers is fufficiently difcernible. Cowley's is fcarcely defcription, unless it be poffible to describe by negatives; for he tells us only what there is not in heaven; Taffo endeavours to reprefent the fplendours

and pleasures of the regions of happinefs. Taffo affords images, and Cowley fentiments. It happens, however, that Taffo's defcription affords fome reason for Rhymer's cenfure. He fays of the Supreme Being,

Hà fotto i piedi e fato e la natura Miniftri humili, e'l moto, e chi'l mifura.

The fecond line has in it more of pe

dantry, than perhaps can be found in

f

any other ftanza of the poem.

L

In the perufal of the Davideis, as of all Cowley's works, we find wit and learning unprofitably fquandered. Attention has no relief; the affections are never moved; we are fometimes furprised, but never delighted, and find much to

admire,