rangement of words and syllables, very different in different countries; but such as, to the inhabitants of each, seemed most melodious and agreeable in sound. Whence arises that great characteristic of poetry which we now call verse; a subject which comes next to be treated of. IT is a subject of a curious nature; but as I am sensible, that, were I to pursue it as far as my inclination leads, it would give rise to discussions, which the greater part of readers would consider as minute, I shall confine myself to a few observations upon English versification. NATIONS, whose language and pronunciation were of a musical kind, rested their versification chiefly upon the quantities, that is, the length or shortness of their syllables. Others, who did not make the quantities of their syllables be so distinctly perceived in pronouncing them, rested the melody of their verse upon the number of syllables it contained, upon the proper disposition of accents and pauses in it, and frequently upon that return of corresponding sounds, which we call rhyme. The former was the case with the Greeks and Romans; the latter is the case with us, and with most modern nations. Among the Greeks and Romans, every syllable, or the far greatest number at least, was known to have a fixed and determined quantity; and their manner of pronouncing rendered this so sensible to the ear, that a long syllable was counted precisely equal in time to two short ones. Upon this principle, the number of syllables contained in their hexameter verse was allowed to vary. It may extend to 17; it can contain, when regular, no fewer than 13: but the musical time was, notwithstanding, precisely the same in every hexameter verse, and was always equal to that of 12 long syllables. In order to ascertain the regular time of every verse, and the proper mixture and succession of long and short syllables which ought to compose it, were invented, what the grammarians call metrical feet, dactyles, spondees, iambus, &c. By these measures was tried the accuracy of composition in every line, and whether it was so constructed as to complete its proper melody. It was requisite, for instance, that the hexameter yerse should have the quantity of its syllables so disposed, that it could be scanned or measured by six metrical feet, which might be either dactyles or spondees (as the musical time of both these is the same), with this restriction only, that the fifth foot was regularly to be a dactyle, and the last a spondee*. * Some writers imagine, that the feet in Latin verse were intended to correspond to bars in music, and to form musical intervals or distinctions, sensible to the ear in the pronunciation of the line. Had this been the case, every kind of verse must have had a peculiar order of feet appropriated to it. But the common prosodies show, that there are several forms of Latin verse which are capable of being measured indifferently, by a series of feet of very different kinds. For instance, what is called the THE introduction of these feet into English verse, would be altogether out of place; for the genius of our language corresponds not in this respect to the Greek or Latin. I say not, that we have no regard to quantity, or to long and short, in pronouncing. Many words we have, especially our words consisting of several syllables, where the quantity, or the long and short syllables, are invariably fixed; but great numbers we have also, where the quantity is left altogether loose. This is the case with a great part of our words consisting of two syllables, and with almost all our monosyllables. In general, the difference made be Asclepedæan verse (in which the first Ode of Florace is written) may be scanned either by a Spondeus, two Choriambus's, and a Pyrrichius; or by Spondeus, a Dactylus succeeded by a Casura, and two Dactylus's. The common Pentameter, and some other forms of verse, admit the like varieties; and yet the melody of the verse remains always the same, though it be scanned by different feet. This proves, that the metrical feet were not sensible in the pronunciation of the line, but were intended only to regulate its construction; or applied as measures, to try whether the succession of long and short syllables, was such as suited the melody of the verse: and as feet of different kinds could sometimes be applied for this purpose, hence it happened, that some forms of verse were capable of being scanned in different ways. For measuring the hexameter line, no other feet were found so proper as Dactylus and Spondees, and therefore by these it is uniformly scanned. But no ear is sensible of the termination of each foot, in reading an hexameter line. From a misapprehension of this matter, I apprehend that confusion has sometimes arisen among writers, in treating of the prosody both of Latin, and of English verse. tween long and short syllables, in our manner of pronouncing them, is so very inconsiderable, and so much liberty is left us for making them either long or short at pleasure, that mere quantity is of very little effect in English versification. The only perceptible difference among our syllables, arises from some of them being uttered with that stronger percussion of voice, which we call accent. This accent does not always make the syllable longer, but gives it more force of sound only; and it is upon a certain order and succession of accented and unaccented syllables, infinitely more than upon their being long or short, that the melody of our verse depends. If we take any of Mr.. Pope's lines, and in reciting them alter the quantity of the syllables, as far as our quantities are sensible, the music of the verse will not be much injured whereas, if we do not accent the syllables according as the verse dictates, its melody will be totally destroyed*. * See this well illustrated in Lord Monboddo's Treatise of the Origin and Progress of Language, Vol. II. under the head of the Prosody of Language. He shews that this is not only the constitution of our own verse, but that by our manner of reading Latin verse, we make its music nearly the same. For we cer tainly do not pronounce it according to the ancient quantities, so as to make the musical time of one long syllable equal to two short ones; but according to a succession of accented and unaccented syllables, only mixed in a ratio different from that of our own No Roman could possibly understand our pronunciation.. verse. OUR English heroic verse is of what may be called an iambic structure; that is, composed of a succession nearly alternate of syllables, not short and long, but unaccented and accented. With regard to the place of these accents, however, some liberty is admitted, for the sake of variety. Very often, though not always, the line begins with an unaccented syllable; and sometimes, in the course of it, two unaccented syllables follow each other. But in general, there are either five, or four, accented syllables in each line. number of syllables is ten, unless where an Alexandrian verse is occasionally admitted. In verses not Alexandrian, instances occur where the line appears to have more than the limited number. But in such instances, I apprehend it will be found, that some of the liquid syllables are so slurred in pronouncing, as to bring the verse, with respect to its effect upon the ear, within the usual bounds. The ANOTHER essential circumstance in the constitution of our verse, is the cæsural pause, which falls towards the middle of each line. Some pause of this kind, dictated by the melody, is found in the verse of most nations. It is found, as might be shewn, in the Latin hexameter. In the French heroic verse, it is very sensible. That is a verse of twelve syllables, and in every line, just after the sixth syllable, there falls regularly and indispensably, a cæsural pause, dividing the line into |