example of some particular virtue, as of holiness, temperance, justice, chastity; and has one complete book assigned to him, of which he is the hero. But besides these twelve knights, severally exemplifying twelve moral virtues, the poet has constituted one principal knight, or general hero, viz. Prince Arthur. This personage represents magnificence; a virtue which is supposed to be the perfection of all the rest. He moreover assists in every book, and the end of his actions is to discover, and win, Gloriana, or Glory. In a word, in this character the poet professes to pourtray, “The image of a brave Knight perfected in the twelve private moral Virtues."

It is evident that our author in establishing one hero, who seeking and attaining one grand end, which is Gloriana, should exemplify one grand character, or a brave Knight perfected in the twelve private moral virtues,

copied the cast and construction of the ancient Epic. But sensible as he was of the importance and expediency of the unity of the hero and of his design, he does not, in the mean time, seem convinced of the necessity of that unity of action, by the means of which such a design should be properly accomplished. At least, he has not followed the method practised by Homer and Virgil, in conducting their respective heroes to the proposed end.

It may be asked with great propriety, how does Arthur execute the grand, simple, and ultimate design, intended by the poet? It

may be answered, with some degree of plausibility, that by lending his respective assistance to each of the twelve Knights, who patronize the twelve virtues, in his allotted defence of each, Arthur approaches still nearer and nearer to Glory, till at last he gains a complete possession. But surely to

1

assist is not a sufficient service. This secondary merit is inadequate to the reward. The poet ought to have made this "brave Knight" the leading adventurer. Arthur should have been the principal agent in vindicating the cause of holiness, temperance, and the rest. If our hero had thus, in his own person, exerted himself in the protection of the twelve virtues, he might have been deservedly styled the perfect Pattern of all, and consequently would have succeeded in the task assigned, the attainment of glory. At present he is only a subordinate or accessory character. The difficulties and obstacles which we ex-1 pect him to surmount, in order to accomplish his final achievement, are removed by others. It is not he who subdues the dragon, in the first book, or quells the magician Busirane, in the third. These are the victories of St. George and of Britomart. On the whole, the twelve Knights do too much for Arthur

دو

to do any thing; or at least, so much as may be reasonably required from the promised plan of the poet. While we are attending to the design of the hero of the book, we forget that of the hero of the poem. Dryden remarks" We must do Spenser that justice to observe, that magnanimity [magnificence] which is the true character of Prince Arthur, shines throughout the whole poem; and succours the rest when they are in distress*." If the magnanimity of Arthur did, in reality, thus shine in every part of the poem with a superior and steady lustre, our author would fairly stand acquitted. At present it bursts forth but seldom, in obscure and interrupted flashes. To succour the rest when they are in distress," is, as I have hinted, a circumstance of too little importance in the character of this universal champion. It is a

* Dedication to the translation of Juvenal.

service to be performed in the cause of the hero of the Epic Poem by some dependent or inferior chief, the business of a Gyas or a Cloanthus.

On the whole, we may observe, that Spenser's adventures, separately taken as the subject of each single book, have not always a mutual dependence upon each other, and consequently do not properly contribute to constitute one legitimate poem. Hughes not considering this, has advanced a remark in commendation of Spenser's critical conduct, which is indeed one of the most blameable parts of it." If we consider the first book as an entire work of itself, we shall find it to be no irregular contrivance. There is one principal action, which is completed in the twelfth canto, and the several incidents are proper, as they tend either to obstruct or promote it*"

* Remarks on the Fairy Queen. Hughes's Edit. of Spenser, vol. 1.