Page:Monsieur Bossu's Treatise of the epick poem - Le Bossu (1695).djvu/315

 and endeavoured to imitate, as near as he could, the Character of the old Greek Comedy, of which we had but a very imperfect Idea in the ancient Roman Satyr, and such, as one might find in a Poem, which Nature alone had dictated before the Romans had thought of imitating the Grecians, and enriching themselves with their Spoils. 'Tis thus you must understand this Passage of the first Satyr of the second Book of Horace.

Quid, cum est Lucilius ausis, Primus in hunc operis componere carmina morem?

Horace never intended by this to say, That there were no Satyrs before Lucilius, because Ennius and Pacuvius were before him, whose Example he followed: He only would have it understood, That Lucilius having given a new Turn to this Poem, and embellish'd it, ought by way of Excellence to be esteemed the first Author. Quinctilian had the same Thought, when he writ, in the first Chapter of the Tenth Book, Satyra quidem tota nostra est, in qua primus insignem laudem adeptus est Lucilius. You must not therefore be of the Opinion of Casaubon, who building on the Judgment of Diomedes, thought that the Satyr of Ennius, and that of Lucilius, were entirely different: These are the very Words of this Grammarian, which have deceived this Judicious Critick: Satyra est Carmen apud Romanos, non quidem apud Graecos maledicum, ad carpenda hominum vitia, Archaeae Comoediae charactere compositum, quale scripserunt Lucilius & Horatius, & Persius. Sed olim Carmen quod ex variis Poematibus constabat, Satyra dicebatur, quale scripserunt Pacuvius & Ennius. You may see plainly, that Diomedes distinguishes the Satyr of Lucilius from that of Ennius and Pacuvius; the Reason which he gives for this Distinction, is ridiculous, and absolutely false. The good Man had not examin'd the Nature and Origin of these two Satyrs, which were entirely like one another, both in Matter and Form; for Lucilius added to it only a little Politeness, and more Salt, almost without Changing any thing: And if he did not put together several sorts of Verse in the same piece, as Ennius has done, yet he made several Pieces, of which some were entirely Hexameters, others entirely Iambics, and others Trechaics, as is evident from his Fragments. In short, if the Satyrs of Lucilius differ from these of Ennius, because the former has added much to the Endeavours of the latter, as Casaubon has pretended, it will follow from thence, that those of Horace, and those of Lucilius, are also entirely different; for Horace has no less refin'd on the Satyrs of Lucilius, than he on those of Ennius and Pacuvius. This Passage of Diomedes has also deceiv'd Dousa the Son. I say not this to expose some light Faults of these great