The Life of Samuel Johnson - James Boswell [856]
a See ante, p. 213.
a My very pleasant friend himself, as well as others who remember old stories, will no doubt be surprized, when I observe that John Wilkes here shews himself to be of the Warburtonian School. It is nevertheless true, as appears from Dr. Hurd the Bishop of Worcester’s very elegant commentary and notes on the ‘Epistola ad Pisones.‘643
It is necessary to a fair consideration of the question, that the whole passage in which the words occur should be kept in view:
‘Si quid inexpertum scence committis, et audes
Personam formare novam, servetur ad imum
Qualis ab incepto processerit, et sibi constet.
Difficile est proprie communia dicere: tuque
Rectius lliacum carmen deducts in actus,
Quäm siproferres ignota indictaque primus.
Publica materies privati juris erit, si
Non circa vilem patulumque moraberis orbem,
Nee verbum verbo curabis reddere fidus
Interpres; nee desilies imitator in artum
Unde pedem proferre pudor vetet aut opens lex.’644
The ‘Commentary’ thus illustrates it: ‘But the formation of quite new characters is a work of great difficulty and hazard. For here there is no generally received and fixed archetype to work after, but every one judges of common right, according to the extent and comprehension of his own idea; therefore he advises to labour and refit old characters and subjects, particularly those made known and authorised by the practice of Homer and the Epick writers.’
The ‘Note’ is,
‘Difficile est proprie communia dicere.’ Lambin’s Comment is ‘Communia hoc loco appellat Horatius argumenta fabularum a nullo adhuc tractata: et ita, quce cuivis exposita sunt et in medio quodammodo posita, quasi vacua et ä nemine occupata.’645 And that this is the true meaning of communia is evidently fixed by the words ignota indictaque,646 which are explanatory of it; so that the sense given it in the commentary is unquestionably the right one. Yet, notwithstanding the clearness of the case, a late critick has this strange passage: ‘Difficile quidem esse proprie communia dicere, hoc est, materiam vulgärem, notam et e medio petitam, ita immutare atque exornare, ut nova et scriptori propria videatur, ultro concedimus; et maximi procul dubio ponderis ista est observatio. Sed omnibus utrinque collatis, et turn difficilis, turn venusti, tarn judicii quam ingenii ratione habitä, major videtur esse gloria fabulam formare penitus novam, quäm veterem, uteunque mutatam, de
novo exhibere.’ (Poet. Prael. v. ii. p. 164.)647 Where, having first put a wrong construction on the word communia, he employs it to introduce an impertinent criticism. For where does the poet prefer the glory of refitting old subjects to that of inventing new ones? The contrary is implied in what he urges about the superiour difficulty of the latter, from which he dissuades his countrymen, only in respect of their abilities and inexperience in these matters; and in order to cultivate in them, which is the main view of the Epistle, a spirit of correctness, by sending them to the old subjects, treated by the Greek writers.
For my own part (with all deference for Dr. Hurd, who thinks the case clear,) I consider the passage, ‘Difficile est proprie communia dicere,’ to be a crux for the criticks on Horace.
The explication which My Lord of Worcester treats with so much contempt, is nevertheless countenanced by authority which I find quoted by the learned Baxter in his edition of Horace: ‘Difficile est proprie communia dicere, h. e. res vulgares disertis verbis enarrare, vel humile thema cum dignitate tractare. Difficile est communes res propriis explicare verbis. Vet. Schol.’648I was much disappointed to find that the great critick, Dr. Bentley, has no note upon this very difficult passage, as from his vigorous and illuminated mind I should have expected to receive more satisfaction than I have yet had.
Sanadon thus treats of it: ‘Proprie communia dicere; c’est a dire, qu’il n’est pas aise de former Ü ces personnages d’imagination, des caracteres particuliers et cependant