ftudy. As to the minstrels, they were, in general, too illiterate to feek after the refinements of diction.

Concerning Occleve, though of fome note in the poetical hiftory of this period, very high things cannot be faid. His principal poem is a tranflation of Egidius on the Government of Princes. Occleve did not excel in vigour of fancy, and there is no great strength in his writings. He had, however, the merit of contributing to the melioration of our language. His pathetic lines on Chaucer, who was his model, and with whom he had probably formed a connection in early life, reflect honour upon the gratitude and fenfibility of his heart.

John Lydgate, a monk of the Benedictine abbey of Bury, in Suffolk, was the poet whofe reputation ftands the highest among the English bards of this age. He poffeffed the advantage of as good an education as the times could afford. After having studied at the university of Oxford, he travelled for improvement into France and Italy. Here he acquired the knowledge not only of the language but of the literature of these countries, and paid a very particular attention to the poetry of both nations. Befides obtaining an acquaintance with all the polite learning which was then cultivated, he was no inconfiderable proficient in the fafhionable philofophy and theology of his contemporaries. The vivacity of his genius, and the verfatility of his talents, enabled him to write a great number of poems, extremely diverfified in their fubjects, and in the nature of their compofition. His three chief productions were the "Fall of Princes," the " Siege of Thebes," and the "Deftruction of Troy." Lydgate is to be reckoned among the improvers of the English tongue. His language is uncommonly perfpicuous for the times he lived in, and his verfes frequently excite furprize from their modern caft. He feems to have been ambitious, at leaft in the ftructure and modulation of his ftyle, of having rivalled Chaucer; but undoubtedly he was far inferior to him in the grand requifites of poetical excellence. His mode of writing is diffufe, and he is not diftinguished by

animation

animation or pathos. Nevertheless, he is not destitute of beauties; and his Deftruction of Troy, in particular, difplays much power of defcription, in conjunction with clear and harmonious numbers.

It is

If it comported with the nature of our defign to recite names only, other perfons might be added. We might mention Hugh Campeden, Thomas Chefter, John Harding, who wrote a chronicle in verfe, and John Norton and George Ripley, whofe poems are didactic. fcarcely expreffing ourselves with propriety to say, that these men were mere verfifiers. While they are totally void of the noble qualities which conftitute genuine poetry, their verfification is rough, unpolifhed, and barba rous. Harding fhould, therefore, be ranked as an antiquary and an hiftorian, and Norton and Ripley as chemical writers. Ripley is understood to have been no mean proficient in the general literature of the times.

However deficient the minstrels of this age might be in many of the excellencies of compofition, they were great favourites with the nation at large. This is evident from the pay which they received from their attendance on particular folemnities. Superftitious as the body of the people were, they were more generous to the adminiftrators to their pleasure than to the leaders of their devotion. During one feaft, while twelve priefts had only four pence each for finging a dirge, the fame number of minstrels were every one of them rewarded with two fhillings and four pence, befides having entertainment provided for themselves and their horfes. At another festival two fhillings were given to the priests, and four to the minftrels; and the latter were treated with the most diftinguished marks of attention and respect.

It is apprehended that the office of poet laureat originated in this period. The Italian, before mentioned, who affumed the name of Titus Livius, is mentioned as having been poet laureat to Humphrey, duke of Gloucester. But this employment, as held under the king, took its rife in the reign of Edward the Fourth; and the first perfon appointed to it was John Kay, of whom no com

pofition is extant which can be confidered as afferting his claim to the character. The only work that remains of him is an English tranflation in profe of a Hiftory of the Siege of Rhodes. A crown of laurel was fometimes conferred, in univerfities, on thofe who had distinguished themselves by their abilities in the writing of Latin, and especially of Latin verfe. Hence the king's laureat might be nothing more than a graduate of this kind, employed in his majesty's fervice. The laureats appear originally to have written only in Latin, which cuftom is fupposed to have continued till the time of the Reformation.

If the discoveries afferted to have lately been made at Bristol are to be credited, we must introduce the name of a poet far more excellent than any whom we have yet men.. tioned, and who would confer a glory on this age prodigiously fuperior to that which hitherto it hath been thought entitled to demand. Our readers will be fenfible that we refer to the poems which Chatterton produced as the works of Thomas Rowley, a fecular prieft of that city, in the fifteenth century. The full difcuffion of this fubject, which affords a very curious literary problem, would be foreign to our defign. We know that Chatterton, when little more than fifteen years of age, brought to his friends certain manufcripts, and a greater number of poems faid to have been transcribed from manufcripts, all of which were alleged to have been found in an old cheft in the bellfrey of St. Mary Redcliffe church, and to contain the genuine productions of this Rowley. We know that these poems are, in many refpects, uncommonly beautiful; and that there is fomething very extraordinary in them, if they were the compofitions of a ftripling, who had no other advantages of education than what could be derived from the inftruction of a common charity school. We know that they exhibit fuch marks of knowledge, and are otherwife accompanied with circumftances of fo furprizing a nature, that it hath been deemed not only a matter of aftonishment but even of impoffibility, that they fhould be written by Chatterton. We know that the authenticity of them, and the exiftence of Rowley, have been maintained

by

by fome able and learned men, with no fmall degree of acuteness and ingenuity. On the other hand, very important arguments and authorities have been urged to prove that they are of modern fabrication. That there ever was fuch a perfon as Rowley has been called in queftion, and ftill more that there could be any poet of that name in the fifteenth century, who was capable of producing the works afcribed to him. It is afked, how he could poffibly have been concealed till within these few years, and how he could avoid being celebrated, in the highest terms of applaufe, by his own contemporaries, and by every fucceeding age. As to the manufcripts afferted to have been difcovered by Chatterton, doubts, which will not admit of an eafy folution, have been raised with regard to the truth of the fact. Independently of all these confiderations, it is alleged, that the poems themfelves afford the most decifive internal evidence of their being recent productions. This hath been argued, with great force of reafoning, from a variety of concurring circumftances. The ftyle, compofition, fentiments, and measure, carry in them the marks of a refinement that was wholly unknown at the period in which they are maintained to have been written. in the abstraction of ideas, in the studied forms of diction, in the harmony of the versification, we are perpetually put in mind of our lateft poets. The ftanza principally ufed was not known in this country till the time of Prior. That fuch a regular piece as the tragedy of Ella fhould come from Rowley, at the period pretended, is abfolutely contrary to every thing of the dramatic kind which exifted at that period. The fact feems to have been, that Chatterton originally wrote the poems in the prefent English language, and afterwards inferted the old words from gloffaries and dictionaries. It is remarkable that when we perufe Rowley with dean Milles's learned notes, the moment we turn our eyes from the commentary to the text, the modern air of the latter strikes us in fo forcible a manner, that the dean's elaborate arguments lofe all power of conviction. it must be added, that many undeniable proofs have been exhibited of the most direct imitation of recent poets, even to the adoption of their very words. Thefe and other confidera 1785.

b

tions

tions have induced a large majority of our ableft antiquaries and critics totally to deny the authenticity of the compofitions in queftion. Should it, however, be allowed, that certain ancient manufcripts were difcovered, and that fome of them contained fragments of verfe, written in the age pretended, Rowley, as we now have him, appears in too questionable a fhape to give the fifteenth century the honour of the works publifhed under his name.

But while (Rowley being rejected) it will be found that little true poetry flourished in England during the prefent period; if we direct our view to the northern kingdom of Great Britain, we fhall meet with diftinguished excellence in a person of the highest station, the fovereign of the country. We mean James the First, of Scotland, who introduced a new literary epocha in the nation over which he reigned. What originally was a great misfortune to this prince, and a flagrant act of injuftice towards him, turned out, in one refpect, eminently to his own service, and highly to the advantage of his country. When he was only a youth of thirteen, he was treacherously taken prifoner by the English, and detained, during the term of eighteen years, in a confinement which was often very ftrict and rigid. His education however, good rudiments of which he had received in Scotland, was not neglected, but attended to with the utmost care. The perfon appointed to be his governor was fir John Pelham, a gentleman of worth and literature, who omitted nothing that could tend to form the mind and manners of his royal charge. James, being bleffed with an admirable genius, and enjoying the ableft mafters of the time, made an uncommon proficiency both in bodily exercises and in mental acquirements. To his knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages, the laft of which he is reprefented as having written with ease, he added an acquaintance with the philofophy of the age. But the ftudies to which he was more peculiarly devoted were thofe of poetry and mufic. These liberal and pleafing arts formed, in his long and close captivity, the principal confolation of his folitary hours. When he was restored to the poffeffion of his throne, from which he had been fo unjustly withheld, his grand object