Satiric Voices in English Verse Satire, 1640-1700 - T-Space

This Evasive Way of Abuse: Satiric Voices in English Verse Satire, 1640-1700

Mark Allan McDayter

A thesis submitted in conform ity with the requiremenls

for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Gnduate Depanment of English University of Toronto

@ Copyright by Mark AlIan McDayter 1997

National Library

Bibliothèque nationale

du Canada

Acquisitions et

Acquisitions and Bibliographie Services

services bibliographiques

395 Wellington Street Ottawa ON K1A ON4

395, nie Wellington Ottawa ON K1A O N 4

Canada

Canada

The author has granted a nonexclusive licence allowing the National Library of Canada to reproduce, loan, distribute or sell copies of this thesis in microform, paper or electronic formats.

L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive permettant à la Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou vendre des copies de cette thèse sous la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.

The author retains ownership of the copyright in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantid extracts fkom it may be printed or otherwise reproduced without the author's permission.

L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans son autorisation.

Canada

This Evasive Way of Abuse: Satiric Voices in English Verse Satire. 1640-1700

Doctor of Philosophy. 1997 Mark Alian McDayter Gnduate Depanment of English. University of Toronto Commencing from a recognition of the ways in which the didactic ends attributed to satire in the later seventeenth-century were fmsuated by the association of the genre with motives of

malice and spite, this thesis examines the means employed by satirists to evade responsibility for their invectives. The obtnisiveness of satiric voice characteristic of the genre focused attention upon the unpleasantly censorious charmer of the satirist. thereby accentuating the subjectivity of satire and obstructing its polemical message. Making reference to a broad range of texis h m pnnt and manuscnpt sources. 1 argue that poets of the period 1640-1700 responded to this dilemma by employing a variety of rhetorical and literary devices to conceai the satirist's voice.

and generate an illusion of objectivity that enhanced the credibility of the satiric attack. My introduction examines the inadequacy of modem responses to the theoreticai problems posed by satiric topicality. Chapter 1 surveys didactic theories of satire in the seventeenth-century. and the ways in which the prominence of satiric voice undermines the genre's polemical intent; it concludes with a discussion of theories of satire that minimized the satirist's responsibility for his or her invective. Chapter 2 features a discussion of the use cifprosopupœiu to conceal the satirist's voice. Chapter 3 sketches out the operations of rhetoricül rthos. with particular reference to Horace. m d to its use by Cowley and Dryden. Chapter 4 explores the uses of pathos in Juvenaiian satire. and Focuses upon John Cleveland. In Chapter 5. the use of burlesque foms as a means of projecting the voice of the satiric victim is discussed. Chapter 6

examines how allusion to the satires of the past is employed to authonze topical saure; the

chapter concludes with an examination of translation a s a means of satinc conceaiment. My

Conclusion looks ahead ro eighteenth-century developmen~in satire tbat m d e d to foreground aesthetic rather than didactic considerations.

One may observe a sort of Naturai Rhetorick, even among the Common Professors of the Art of Railling . . . . Besides the use of their admirable Art of Canting. they have a cunning way of Jeenng. accusing others by justifying thernselves. and saying. I never did --or by asking the Question generai. Who did so and sol Why who did you Whore cries 'torher? did I ? and so die Game begins; but by this evasive way of Abuse ihey will be sure to keep wide off the Law's Tenterhooks. Raillerie u Iri Mode Consideril: 01.the Supercilio~is Derructor. (London, 1673) 40-42.

Acknowledgements

1 have benefitted. dui-ing the preparation of this thesis. from the insights and ideas of a

great many people. In particular. I should like to thank Professor Hugo de Quehen. who provided invaluable advice and support in his capacity as my Supervisor. and Professor John Baird whose contribution was tmly above and beyond the cal1 of duty. Three others whom 1 should like to single out are Michael McClintock. who provided much stimulating conversation when I was in the early stages of my work. Margaret McGeachy. who gencrously expended a great deal of rime

Listening to my laments and complaints. and Joe Black. who cheerfully placed his enormous expertise and knowledge at my disposai.

1 would d s o iikc to extend my thanks io the Social Sciences and Humanities Research

Council of Canada and the University of Toronto Depanment of English for having provided îünding for this project Last but certainly not l e s t among my debts is Ihat which 1 owe to my famiiy and. most especially. to my wife Cathy. whose unwavering love and support has conclusively reîüted (werc refutation tmly necessary) everything that satirists have ever said about mimiage-

Preface

When ciling from both printed and manuscript sources, 1 have endeavoured to reproduce

to as exact a degree as was practical the text as it appears in the original. For this reason, 1 have

retained original spelling, punctuation. and itaiics. modemizing only the long "S." I have employed modem critical editions of pnrnary sources wherever a tnistworthy original spelling edition euisted; othenvise. I have quoted tiom an original prinied or manuscripi source. This has meant that I have generally been unable to cite from the two rnost readily accessible modemspelling editions of seventeenth-century satinc verse. the Yale P o e m on Affairs of Stase and John

Harold Wilson's Court Sutires of the Rrstoration: where possible. citations of poems include rekrence to the pages on which the work in question appeas in these two anthologies. Manuscript conventions and abbreviations have been retained (excepting only the long "s"): [rat reproduced here in bold appears as such in the original rnanuscnpt source. Capitaiization has k e n normalized in citing al1 titles, and I have used the the standard t o m of authors' nmes. Titles of individual poems frequentiy Vary. and I have employed that given in the source from whiçh the work is cited. In footnotes. I have Crequently ernployed short titles: Full titles can be hund in my bibliography. Translations are given whenevcr possible kom seven~eenth-or cightecnth-century translations. I have generally used the translation most popular in the period (as for exmple Alexander Brome's 1666 Horace). except on rare occasions when the seventeenth-century tcndency towards "par;iphrastical"translation or imitation has obscured or distorted Ihe rneaning

of the original. Al1 of the manuscripts and many ot' the pnnted sources cited in this thesis were exarnined from microfilm copies.

Table of Contents Abstrac t Epigraph Acknowledgements

Preface Table of Contents Abbreviations and Works Frequently Cited Introduction Chapterl

"CriminalDe1ight":SatiricPolemicandVoicc

Chapter2

"ForStonesDoeSpeake":SatiricProsopopœia

Chapter 3

"The Pleasant Reproofs of a Gentleman": Horace and Ethos

Chapter 4

"The Pleasure of Concemment": Juvenal and Pathos

Chapter 5

Living Dissections: Burlesque Satire

Chapter 6

"A Just and Secret History": Satiric Occasion and Translation

Conclusion Works Consulted

Abbreviations and Works Frequentiy Cited ARP

David M . Vieth. Attribution in Resroration Poerp: A Stu& of Rochester's Poems of 1680. New Haven: Y ale UP. 1963.

Aubrey

John Au brey. "Brief Lives, " Chiefly of Conrernporaries. Ser du^ by John Aubrey, between the Years 1669 und 1696. Ed. Andrew Clark. 2 Vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1898.

Brome

Horace. The Poems of Horace. Consisring of Odes, Sapres. and Episrles. Rendred in Engiish Vrrsr by Sei~erulPersons. Ed. AIexander Brome. London, 1666.

Buckingham

George Villiers. 2nd Duke of Buckingham. Buckinghum: Pir blic und Private Man. The Prose. Poem und Commonpkice Book of George Villiers. Second Dukr of Buckingham 11628-1687). Ed. Christine Phipps. The Renaissance Imagination 13. New York and London: Garland, 1985.

Burnet

Gilbert Bumet Bishop Burnct's Histop ofHis Oit-n Time. 2 Vols. Eds. Gilbert Burnet and Sir Thomas Burnet. London. 1724, 1734.

Clarendon

Edward Hyde. Earl of Clarendon. The Hisroc of rhe Rebellion rrnd Civil Wars in England brgiin in the Yeor 1641. Ed. W. Dunn Macray. 6 Vols, Oxford: Clarendon, 1958.

Cowley

Abraham Cowley. n t r Collectvd Wotks of Abraham Coide-. Eds. Thomas O. Calhoun, Laurence Heywonh. er ni. 6 vols. Newark: U of Delaware P. 1989-.

Creech

Horace. The Odes. S r i p n . und Episrles of Horacr. Trins. Thomas Creec h. London. 1684.

CSPD Conirnonwealth

CSPD Charles II

Public Record Oftïce. Cale~idrirof Sratr P u p o ~Dornrsric . Series. [ m e Cornmonwealthl. Ed. Mary Anne Everctt Green. 13 Vols. London: Longman and Co.. 1876.

Public Record Office. Calendar of State Papers. Donrrsric Serirs. of the Reign of Charles I. Ed. William Douglas Hamilton. 23 Vols. London: Her Majesty's S tationery Office. 1891.

CSP Venetian

Public Record Office. Culendur of Stare P apers and Manuscriprs Relating to English Affairs Eristing in the Archives and Collections of Vrnice and in Other Libraries of Northern Ituly. Ed. Allan B. Hinds. London: His Majcsty's Stationery Office. 1939.

" Discourse"

John Dryden. "Discourse Conceming the Progress and Original of Satire." ( 1693). in The Works of John D ~ y l e n below, . 4: 3-90.

DNB

n i e Dictionaiy of National Biography.

Dryden

John Dryden. me Works of John D ~ c l r n .Eds. H. T. Swedenberg. Jr.. Earl Miner, et al. 20 vols. Berkeley: U of California P. 1956-.

Evelyn

John Evclyn. The Diary of John Evekn. Ed. E. S. de Beer. 6 Vols. Oxford: Clarendon. 1955.

Ho1yday

Juvenal. Decimrts Jrtnius Juvenalis. and Aulus Persius Flaccus Trunsluted and lllustroted. Trans. Barten Ho1yday. Oxt'ord. 1673.

Kinsley

John Dryden. The Poems of John Dtyden. Ed. James Kinsley. 4 Vois. Oxford: Clarendon. 1958.

Lu ttrell

Narcissus Luttrell. A Brief Historicol Relarion of Srutu Affuirs $ v m Seprember 1678 ro April 1714. 6 Vols. Oxford: Oxford UP. 1857. Andrew Marvell. The Poems and Lrtters of Andrew Mrrrvell. 3rd Ed. Eds. H. M. Margolioulh. Pierre Legouis and E. E. Duncan Jones. 2 Vols. Oxford: Clarendon. 197 1.

Muses Farewel

The Muses Farewel to Popet? & Sluipery. Or. A Collection of Miscelfuny Poems, Saprs, Songs, &c. 2nd ed. London. 1690.

New Collection

A New Collection of Poems Reluring tu S m r Af/airs. From Oliver Cronzwel ta this Present Tinze. London, 1705.

OED

0-rford English Dictionap. (2nd ed.)

Oldham

John Oldham. The Poeins OfJohn Oldliu~n.Eds. Harold F. Brooks and Raman Selden. Oxford: Clarendon. 1985.

. . . By A----- M----4 Esq; and Other Eminent Wits. Most Whereof Never Beforr Pt-intrd. 3 Vols. [London], 1689.

A Collecrion of Poems on Affuirs of Statr

PUAS 1697

P o e m on Affuirs of State: Frorn the Time of Oliver Cromwell, to the Abdication of K. James the Second 1697-1707. 5th ed. (Vol. lonly). 4 Vols. [London], 1703- 1707.

POAS Parr 111

Poems on Afuirs of Sture: From Olii~erCromwell. To this Present Time . . . Parr III. [London], 1698.

POAS Yale

George de F. Lord. et al., eds. Poem on A#kirs of State: Augustan Satitical Verse, 1660-1740. 7 vols. New Haven: Yale UP. 1963-75.

P~PYS

Samuel Pepys. The Dia? of Samuel Pt.pus. Eds. Robert Latharn and William Matthews. 1 1 Vols- London: Bell and Hyman. 1970-83.

Rochester

John Wilmot, 2nd EarI of Rochester. The Porrns of John Wilmot. Ead of Rochester. Ed. Keith Waiker. Oxford: Basil BIackwell, 1984.

Rochester 1680

John Wilrnot, 2nd EarI of Rochester, et al. Rochester's Poems on Sewrul Occasions. Ed. James Thorpe. Princeton Studies in English 30. Princeton: Prince ton UP. 1950.

Rump Songs

Rump: Or An Exucr Collection of rhe Chqcest Porms crnd Songs Relating to the Lute Times. l3-v the Most Eminent Wits.FI-onzAnno

1639 to Anno 1661. 2 Vols- London, 1662.

Swift

Jonathan Swift. The Prose Works of Jonathan Sicifi. Ed. Herbert Davis. 14 vols. Oxford: Clarendon. 1937-68.

Ward

John Dryden. The Lcrters of John Dtyien. W h Lrttrrs Addressed to Him. Ed. Charles Eugenc Ward. Durham: Duke UP. 1942.

Wilson

John Harold Wilson. ed. Court Sutires of the Rrstot-urion. Columbus: Ohio State UP, 1976,

Wood

Anthony à Wood. Arhenœ Omnienses: An Emct Hisror? of Ail the Wrirers and Bishops Who Ha iveHad Their Educution in the Most Anrienr and Famous Universi' of O.@ord. 2nd ed. 2 Vols. London.

Abbreviated Periodical Ti tles AHR

Americun Historical Review

EA

Études Angluises

BIHR

Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Reseurch

EAL

Early Arnrrican Literu rure

EC

Essuys in Criticism

ECent

The Eighteenth-Centri-: und Interpremtion

ECL

Eighteenth Centci? Lifr

ECS

Eigh rem th- C mtut? Srudies

EHR

Eng lish Historicul Re vie \s

EL

Essuys in Litei-citut-e

ELH

English Litrrccq Histop

ELR

English Litercit? Renuissunce

EMS

English Manuscript Stridies 1100-

BSE BNYPL

Brno Studies in English Bulletin of the New York Public Libraq

CahiersE Cahiers Elisabéthains CCrit

CE CentR

Theoi-

Comparative Criticism College English Centennial Review

CHJ

Cambridge Histo i-ical Journul

CQ

Cambridge Quarter&

CL

Cornparurive Literurure

CLS

Coinpurntive Literurrire Stridies

Eng S

Englische Snidien

CML

Classiccd and Modern Liturutiire

ERC

Erplorurions iil Remissctncr Cci11crr.e

ColfG

Colloqciiu Germaitica

ES

Eilglish Stridies

E&S

Essays and Studirs

ESC

Eng 1ish Studies in Cmmdlt

FMLS

Foiunz for Modern Lunguage Studes.

1700

ContR

Contenzpoi-UVReview

CP

Clussical Philology

CritI

Criticol lnyui~y

CritQ

Critical Qrinrteriy

DR

Dalhousie Review

FSB

French Stuciies Bulletin

DUJ

D~ir-hurnU~ziversitÿJournal

HLB

Hrri-vurd Librut? Bulletin

xi

HL&

Huntington Library Quarterly

NLH

New Lirerut? History

HR

Hispunic Review

NM

Nruphilologische Mitteilungen

HT

Histor-y and fieon:

NMQ

Nor: Mexico

Hu&

H d w n Review

N&Q

Notes and Queries

IJCT

International Journal of the Clussicul Tradition

NRRSL

Notes and Records of the Roy1 Socirg of b n d o n

JBS

Journal of British Stuclies

OBSPP

OMOi d Bibliog raphica 1 Sociery Proceedings und P(rpers

JEGP

Journal of English and Gernzunic Ph ilology

PAPS

PI-ocrrtlingsof the Amcrican Philosophical Sociesy

PBSA

Pupe rs of the Bibliogmpli ical Society of Alnerico

PFSCL

Pupers on French Se venteenth Centtic Litrrcrture

PLL

Papen on hngrrcrge crncl Lire 1-ature

PMU

Priblicrctions of the Modern Lcing ungr Association

PP

Pmt untl Present

MiltunQ Milton Qricirte-

PQ

Philulugicril QUUI-tr ~-fy

MiltonS

Milton Stridies

Pst

Prose Strtciies

MLQ

Modem Lunguage Quorterly

PULC

The Princeton U n i v u r s i ~

JHI JMRS

JWCI KR

Journal of the Histoty of Icfeus Journal of Medieid und Renaissance Studies Jori~*nalof the Warburg anri Courtlrrild Institute Kenyon Re vie rv

LangBS Lnngrirzge und Style

LC

Librci- Chroniclr ( Uniiwaity of Pennsy l vania)

Chr-onicle

MLR

Modern Language Revieiï

MP

Modern Philologq.

M m

Michigon Qriarterly Reiiew

xii

QQ

Qwelz 2 Quar.rti1-1~

QR

Qliri~-terly Reiieii:

RECTR

Rrstoration and 18th Centuq Theatre Research

RenP

Renuissunce Pupers

RenSt

Renaissance Studies

RES

Review of English Srudies

SStrrd

Sir-ifr Studies

SVEC

Stiidies on Voltaire and the Eightrrnrh Centun

TCBS

Trunsuctions of the Cmnbridge Bibliogrnpht'cd Society

TRHS

Tt-ansuctionsof the Royul Histo riccrl Socien

RMS

Renaissance and Modern Stucfies

RPLit

Res Publica Litteruriinz: Studies in the Clussical Tradition

TSLL

Texus Stndies in Lmgrrcrgr und Literatrr ru

SatN

Sutire Neivsletre r

TStL

Tennessee Sttrriies in Lire rutu rr

SB

Studies in Bibliogruphy

TSWL

Tulsa Stutiies in Wonzen's Literut~lri?

SCB

South Central Bulletin UCPE

Unive rsih of Ccr liforn iu Publicutions in English

ULR

Uniwrsip of Lerdr Reïiew

UTQ

Uitivursiy of Toronro Quurterly

WMQ

Wiliiurn und M u n Qirurterb

Studirs in Eighteentli Centut? Cirltitre

wus

Washington Uniie,:ticStrrdies

SEL

Studies in English Literuture

YES

Yecrrbook of Eny lish Studies

SoR

Southem Review

YFS

Yde F W I I CStit~fies ~

SP

Stuciies in Philology

YR

Yde Revieiv

SCent

The Se venteenth Crrituq

SCFS

Seventeenth-Centut? French Studies

SCRe v SECC

South Central Revie rt*

SP WVSRA Selected Popers from the West Virginia Shakespeare and Renaissunce Association

Sc?

Shakespecue Qiiurterly

SR

Sewanee Review

Introduction

In 1687. Henry Higden published A Modern Essriy on the Tenth Sutyr of Juvenal, an experimental translation of the rnost popular of the Roman satirisi's poems into tetrameter couplets. Pursuing the method he had employed the year previous in A Modern Essay on the Thirteenth Satyr of Juvenal, Higden "aimed to ubate" Juvenal's "seriocis Rigour. "' The results

seem, on occasion. curiously burlesque:' Since the rude Thracion in his City Ne'er saw procession half so pretty , As modem Pageantry and State Does on our City-Triumphs wait; Than which no Interlude is gayer. Whilst Sword and Cap usher the Mayor; A Cap that does with Heads dispense Without regard of Brains or Sense: And whose mysterious Power translates Mec hanick Furs to Po ten tates, From weighing Plumbs, to ballance States. (9) In Higden's translation. Juvenal's depiction of a triumph through Rome becornes the Lord Mayor's Procession: Higden's greatest challenge lay not in the translation of Juvenal's Latin. but in iïnding modem equivaients for die Roman poet's topical references. He has generally remaincd Eaithful to his source. he writes. because of his conviction that " a l / Satyr" has "ri strong triste of the H~imour

' A Modern E s s q on the Thirteenth Sarÿr of Juvenal (London. 1686) sig. [b27. Dryden praises the translater for having ''remper'd'' Juvenal with Horatian rallery. and having joined "the Vertues of Two Stiles in One." "To My Ingenious Friend. Mr. Henry Higden. Esq.." A Mo~lrrrt Essay on the Tenfh Savr of Juiienal (London. 1687) sig. [A47. See G . L. Broderson. "Seventeenth-Century Translations of Juvenal." Phoenix 7 (1953): 72-73. Raman Selden. "Juvenal and Restoration Modes of Translation." MLR 68 (1973): 492-93, and William Kupersmith. Romun Sntirists in Snanternth-Centun England (Lincoln and London: U of Nebraska P. 1985) 123-30.

and particular Hints of the Times wherrin they were w i r , tvhich is indercl the Life ancl Brauty of Satyr" (sig. [a47). Higden is more willing to rob Juvenal of his "lofty Rhirnes" (as Aphra Behn phrased it in her cornmendatory poem) than to eliminate reference to the satire's histoncal context.' And yet.

as Elkanah Settle, another of Higden's admirers. points out. the characteristic topicality of the genre is iîs greatest liahility: "ivhilstthe warm I n f r i p e is just fortnd out, " scandalous satire is applauded. but once the occasion is past. satire "liesNeglrcted, cincl Forgot us soon." The translation of ancient satire is difficult because "Commentators"must "groupivithorît a Clur" to resurrect long-forgotten scandais." The "strong tuste of the H~iniuurcind p ~ ~ - r i c dHints u r of the

Times wherein thev were writ" is both the "rhe L$e and B c u i t ~of Satyr." and the greatcst threat to its endurance.

To critics accustomed to the satire of the seventeenth- and eightcenth-centuries, the dilemma posed by Settle secms tàmiliar. If. as George Test has written. "satire tends to go out of date very quickly and bccome as dead as l u t month's news." it is because last month's -- or lut century's -- news is precisely its most çomrnon s ~ b j e c t .As ~ John Bmard has written of

' "To Henry Higden. Esq.;

On his Translation of the Tenth Satyr of Juvenal" sig. [al'].

' "To H.Higden. Esq.;

On his Modem Way of Translating Juven J ' s Tenth Satyr" sig. [a37. Joseph Trapp remarked that "Modem Satires will always appear with an Advantage. which the Ancients want. viz. we are beiter acquainied with the Characters." Lectur-es on Portt?. 1742. trans. William Bowyer and William Clarke ([Menston]: Scolar P. 1973) 236n. Sec iilso Swift's comments in The E.raminet* 18 (December 7. 17 10)on topical writing: "although thc present Age may understand well enough the little Hints we give. the Parallcls we draw. and the Charactcrs we desctibe; yet this will al1 be lost to the next" (3: 32).

Satire: Spirit und Art (Tampa: U of South Florida UP. 1991) 2. Ralph. W. Rader defines satire as "a work whose intelligibility and value is determined by a fonnally embodied intention to ridicule an object understood to exist outside the work." but adds that its continued

occasional poems. "any grasp of thern as poetic structures. as wholes. depends upon a working knowledge of their historical context -- the context and function implied by and embodied in their original f ~ r r n . "Despite ~ the footnotes of modem editions. even the most casual seader of poems like Absalorn and Achitophel orten feels tike one of Settle's groping "Commentcrtors." Satire has, since Restoration and eighteenth-century litenture was "rescued" frorn neglect in the early ~wentieth-century.re-achieved a legitimacy that it had lost in the nineteenth.' Even so. partisans of the genre frequently exhibit embarrassrnent when attempting to vindicate the ways

or Dryden and Pope. A. G. Bames. who compiled one of the first modem anthologies to take satire as its subject. adroitly avoids giving judgment on whether "satire can ever be really great poetry" and begs the question when he blames the neglect of English verse satire on the

"mis fortune" of satirists' choice of genre:"ugh

Waiker. writing of Butler. similarly suggesied in

value depends upon "the degree to which a knowledge of the external object adequate to a full response is intemally inferable frorn the work itself." "The Concept of Genre and EighteenthCentury Studies." New Applaaches to Eightrrnth-Centriru Litemttrre. ed. Phillip Harth (New York and London: Columbia UP, 1974) 102, 106. "Dryden: History and The Mighty Government of the Nine,"' ULR 24 ( 1% 1 ): 22. Sec also Edward W. Rosenheim. Swift and the Saririst's Art (Chicago: U of Chicago P. 1963) 1-34 and passiril, and Gerard W. O'Connor, "Histoncal Criticism of Satire." SatN 6 ( 1968): 9- 12. 7

A good thumb-nail history of twentieth-century attitudes to the genre can be Lound in Brian A. Connery and Kirk Combe's "Theorizing Satire: A Retrospective and Introduction." Theorizing Satire, eds. Brian A. Connery and Kirk Combe (New York: St Martin's P. 1995) 1-

15. A Book of English Verse Satire. ed. A. G . Bames (London: Methuen. 1926) v. See also C. W. Previte-Orton, Politicai Satire in English P o e t v (Cambridge: Cam bridge UP. L 9 10) 5-6, Edward Lucie-Smith. The Pcnguin Book of Sutirical Verse (Hannondsworth: Penguin. 1967) 19. Gilbert Highct. The Anutomy of Satire. 1962 (Princeton: Princeton UP. 1972) 3. and F. R. Leavis' sneering denigration of Dryden's "pamphleteering verse" and "satiric pamphlets." in Revaluation, 1936 (London: Chatto and Windus. 1962) 32. 8

1925 that "Satire at its best is a second-rate kind of litenture."" Embamsment is similarly a Feature of the two most important anthologies of late seventeenth-century satire. the mammoth Yale edition of Pornzs on Affairs of Stare: A~igusranSatiricril Versr. 1660-1714 ( 1963-75). presided over George deForest Lord. and John Harold Wilson's more modest. but equdly important. Court Satires of the Restoration ( 1976). It would be difficult to overstate the value of the Yale Poems on Affuirs of Sturr: the sheer bulk and variety of materials thai it includes provides an invaluable insight into the context of the satire and state poems of the period. Yet. even here. in a collection proksscdly devoted to the ephemeral. the topical. and the political. we find Lord writing of his subject with that perennial sense of embarrassrnent and admitting, reluctantly. that "satire directed at ephemeral issues and

peeons seems above ail to lack die autonomy or universaiity of tnie poetry" (POAS Y& 1: xlix1). Lord's response to this fdacy is characteristic of the New Criticism: "The richcst satire," hc confidently asserts. "is that which transmutes concrete historical realities into univcrsiils. Its fictions include but ttanscend historical fact" (li). A successlùl satire achieves an "autonomous poetic life" (IV) precisely because it leaves topical refercnce behind. But if Lord is anxious to

prove that Restoration satire does exhibit the "autonomy or universality of uue poetry." he iinds his thesis undercut at every tum by the materials he has chosen. Reading and understanding seventeenth-century sarire is hard work: Stephen College could assume that the reader of his A S a y againsr In-Justice: Or, Sc--gs upon Sc--gs ( 1679) would know who the subjeci of his

attack. Lord Chief Justice Sir William Scmggs. was. and what he had donc. Thc voluminous

English Satire and Satirisrs (London and Toronto: J. M. Dent; New York: E. P. Dutton, 1925) 143.

notes available to the modem reüder of this poem in the Yale edition çan only begin to redress our initial disadvantlge in this regard. And these note are volurninous: quantitatively. there is probably more "history" in the Yale collection than poetry.1° Lord's own editorial practice perforce must undermine our faith in the "autonomy" of his material. John Harold Wilson's Coiirt Satires of the Restoration differs tiom the Yale Porms on

Affuirs ofState in that its materials are coterie satires attacking "Court personalities. lilerary and theatrical figures" rather than state affairs (CVilso/zxi).I ' "Court satires." Wilson wri tes. are in some ways "more interesting and useful thm the politid poems because they tell u s a great dcal about the lives and manners of Restontion high society. Partisan political satire is ephemenl; personal satire is more likely to be universal" (xi). We note again the preference for the "universal": Wilson's thesis. however. implies Lhat the reader o l a satire attacking die Duchess of Portsmouth as a French whore ignores the historical identitication, and ~ i x e instcad s upon the generaiized "çharacter." It is difrtcult to imagine anyone rcading Wilson's coltection in quite this way. These are not abstracted images of vice: court satire w u expressly written (to quote a lampoon that appean in Corrrr Satires) to "tell you who fucks who."" The reader is swept up in a

This is evcn l i e r of "detinitive" editions of such satires: the California Dryden provides 77 pages of commentary to explain Absalorn n i d Achirophcl. more than twice the length of the poem itself. In Paul Hammond's edition. context literally overwhelms poctry: thc explanatory footnotes entirely push Dryden's text tiom the page on a nurnber of occasions. 'O

The distinction is. in some ways. artificial: as Lord notes. "affairs of state" arc "as likely to be the love aftàirs ol kings and courtiers" as "matters of public policy" (POAS Y d r 1: xxvi). See also Basil Greenslade. "Affairs of State."Spirit of Wit: Reconsidcrotions of Rochester, ed. Jeremy Treglown (Harnden. CT: Archon. 1982) 92- 1 10. "

" "Satyr." BL MS Hari. 69 13 f. 132'; Wilson 8 1-85. See also Alastair Bellany. "'Rayling Rymes and Vaunting Verse': Libellous Politics in Early Stuart Englmd. 1603- 1678." Gdtrrt-em d Politics in Ear& Stuart Englund, eds. Kevin Shaipe and Peter Lake. (Houndmills and London:

whirlwind of scandalous gossip thai is unyieldingly topical and particular. More honest is Wilson's comment that such poems "tell us a great deal about the lives and manners of Restoration high society": here. he concedes as lost the "autonomy" that Lord insisted upon.

From this perspective. the anthology is a collection of historical documents: social and political context, far from merely informing the poetry. becomes its raison cl'irrr. Modern editors are, relative to their seventeenth-çenturycounterparts. at a disadvantage. Henry Higden could make relevant to a contemporary audience the satire of another age by means of modemization; indeed. translation from Latin is. by definition. ü " modernization." a radical transformation of a text that opens it up to other possibilities. It is a relatively small step îi-om translating the coronce of Juvenal's tnurnphant generai as "crown." to rendering il as the Lord Mayor's "Cap" of office. Such modeniizations help obviate the need for explanatory footnotes. an important facet of the success of seventeenth-century resurrecrions of ancient satire:

üs

Dudley

Fitts has rightly pointed out. "Topicality, the recondite allusion. special jargon -- these are matters that c m not be handled even in a Nabokovian foouiotc without inviting the cmbrxe of dcath."" A modemized text. one that renders the topical in contcmporary terms. has a much better chance

of success with a modem audience. As Dryden expiained to the readers of his 1693 collaborative edition of Juvenal and Persius:

If sometimes any of us (and 'tis but seldome) make him [Juvenal]express the Customs and Manners of our Native Country. nther than oT Ruine; 'tis. eithrr when there was some kind or Analogy. betwixt their Customes and ours; or when. to make him more easy to Vulgar Understandings. we gave him those Manners

Macmillan, 1994) 286-87.

'' 1966) 39.

"The Poetic Nuance." On Translation. ed. Reubcn A. Brower (New York: Oxford UP.

which are fmiliar to us. ("Discourse," 89)14 Ir is an index of the obduncy of satiric topicali~ythat. despite rnodemization. seventeenthcentury tnnslators were siill invariably forced to use notes. Buten Holyday atlernpted to make his 1673 translation of Juvenal and Persius "as free from Annotations. as die Argument would permit'' (Holyday sig. [b 17). but was. as William Kupersmith has pointed out. "very unsuccessful"

(39).15Higden's Essu? on Juvend's Satire 10 similarly includes both Latin comrnentary in the margins. and 9 pages of "Annotations" in English. And yet. notes could aid the translater by providing modem panllels for mcient retèrences. Holyday's notes tiequenlly draw such pardlels: "Suburra." he tells us in his notes to Juvenal's Satire 3. "was the Cheapside of Rome" (44). John Harvey. in his The Tenth S a y of Juvenal Dune into English Verse. used notes to score political

~ translation." writes Paul points. identifying Mark Antony as "a bloody Roman T ~ r y . " ' "Good Harnmond. "is occasional." necessitating Ihe introduction of "a whole new nexus of

'" J. McG. Bottkol points out that "Dryden often chooses to embody material we should put into footnotes in the translation itsell." and "wrote only a k w scattered notes with great reluctance." "Dryden's Latin Scholarship." MP 40 (194243): 248. Sec also William Frost. Dqden m d the Art of Translation. 1955 (Hamden. CT: Archon Books. 1969) 39. Dryden modemized less "seldome" than he admits; see however Michael Wilding. "Dryden and Satire: 'Mactlecknoe. Absalom and Achitophel. The Medall.' and luvenül." John Dryden. cd. Earl Miner. Wnters and their Background (London: G. Bell and Sons. 1972) 2 18-24.

' Holyday's notes an: lengthy: Juvenal's Satire 1. which runs to less than 6 pages. is accompanied by some 12 pages of "Notes" and "Illustrations." rendered in cnmped type. l6 The Tenth Sutyr of Juvenal Dune intu English Verse (London. I693'!) 2 1 (mispaginated as 9); see Kupersmith 140. See also Harvey's note on Ulubra in Satire 10: "not to complernent this Town; it was a sad poor one . . . a little better than Cnsrle-Rising. and no&quite so good as Highcrrn Ferrcirs in Northamptonshire" (10).

circumstances, associations and values." " Hipden's assenion that " rhe Life and Beuuty of Satyr" resides in its topical particularity rests upon a faith in the usefulness of history. Seitle praises Higden because he has made the past relevant: 'Great Juvenal's Wir. ivho in un English Scrne, / Bv Tirne's long Rusr ur brsr hod pointless been, / niou grind'st to a New Edge. tu cur more keen " ( s i g [a31).The rnodernized

Juvenal has been tnnslated through tirne and space as well as through Ianguage. and his polemical

signiîlcance revived by demonstrating that his critique of Roman society applied to seventeenlhcentury England. Fundamental to this method was the period's conception of history. History "instmcted" in much the way that satire (and. indeed, most other genres) did: indecd. as Edward

Young was to write in the pretàce to The Love of Fume: "Historians thrmselves may be considerfd as Satirists, and Satirists rnost severe; since such are rnost human Actions. that to

relate. is to expose them."18 History's patterns are recurrcnt:lY the task of the historian. lik that

" John Okiham und the Renewal of Clossicol Cultwe (Cambridge: Cambridge UP. 1983) 2.64. Restoration translation. as Hardin Craig asserted. "put a local and temporary starnp on al1 that it did. marked it for almost the sole use of its own age. and took pride in so doing." "Dryden's Lucian." CP 16 ( 1921): 150, l 8 The Love of Fame. 2nd ed. (London. 1728) sig. [a2']. See also Dryden's assertion in Absaloni and Achirophel that he is "on1-vthe Hisroriun" of the evenü he recounts (4). 19

See Emest Lee Tuveson. Millennium and Utopia (Berkeley and Los Angeles: U of

California P. 1949) esp. 56-70 and Joseph LM.Levine. "Ancients. Modems. and History: The Continuity of English Histoncal Wnting in the Later Seventeenth Century." St~cdiesin Changr and Reialurion, ed. Paul Korshin (Menston: Scolar P. 1972) 43-76. The idea of "Restoraiion" reinforced cyclical theories. See Hobbes' Bchrrnorh (London. 1682): "1 have x e n in this Revolution a circular motion. of the Sovereign Power through two Usurpes. from the lace King to this his Son" (338); see also Jonathan Sawday. "Re-Wriling a Revolution: History. Symbol. and Text in the Restoration," SCenr 7 ( 1992): 17 1-99. For a discussion of classical antecedents to this view. see Beatiice Reynolds, "Shifting Currents in Histoncal Cnticism." JHI 14 ( 1953): 47 192.

of the poetic imitator, was to make precedents, examples. and parallels clear." From such parallels, the thoughtful reader could predict the future." As Sir William Temple opined. "whilst Human Nature continues what it is, The same Qrders in State, The sume Discipline in A~mies,

The same Reverence for rhings Sacre4 And Respect of Civil Instirutions, The scune Virrrm nnd Dispositions of Princes and Magistrates. . . Will eiwr have the same effecrs."" As Temple's remarks suggest. this faith in history was prediçated upon the conception of a general and consistent human nature." As Thomas Hearne commented in 1704, "Mankind being

The Jesuit historian Pierre Le Moyne notes that history proceeds "by Erainplrs that lead straight and without by-ways to Use and Practice." Of the A r t Both of Writing & Judging of History (London, 1695) 37. Sir William Temple similarly argued that the historian is concemed with "Example or Instruction to Postenty. which are the great Ends of History." An Innvducrion tu the History of England (London. 1695) 30 1. For a discussion of the "exemplar heory of history." see George H. Nadel. "Philosophy of His~orybefore Historicism." Sturiies in the Philosophy of History. ed. George H. Nadel (New York: Harper and Row. 1965) 49-73 and James William Johnson, n i e Formation of Engïish Neo-Classiccil Thoright (Princeton: Princeton UP. 1967) esp. 3 1-68. 'O

" See Royce MacGillivny. "The Use of Predictions in Seventeenth-Century Historians." Cithara 8.1 ( 1968): 54-63. Sir Robert Howard "foretold" the Glorious Revolution through his study of Edward 11 and Richard II: in 1685. having "consiclei-'drhe Proceedings of the Governmenr" under Charles II and James II. he "pmciv 'd how rxuctly t h e follow il the steps of these MO unforrunute Kings, and I thrn expected to see ri Rrvolrttion resembling rheii-S." The Histol? of the Reigns of Edwnrd and Richard II (London. 1690) sig. [ASY. 13

-- Observations rrpon the United Provinces (London, 1673) sigs. [ A 6 7

" The influence of this idea upon literary theory was immense. See Dryden's "A Parallel. of Poetry and Painting" (1695): "Nature is still the same in ail Ages. and can never be contrary to her self. Thus from the practice of Æschylus, Sophocles. and Ewipides, Arisrurle drew his Rules for Tragedy; and Philostratus for Painting" (De Arte Graphicu 57). The quiirrel of the ancients and the modems represents a batrle between stable and progressive views of history. and correspondingly different ideas about human nature; A. H. de Quehen notes that Sir William Temple "saw Phalaris as some ancient contemporary." "Richard Bentley's Spider-Web." IJCT 1 (1994): 95. See also Joseph M. Levine. Hurnrinisnz and Histury (Ithaca and London: Corne11 UP. 1987) 155-77. and his more recent The Batrle of the Books. 199 1 (Ithaca and London: Corne11 UP. 1994) esp. 267-90.

the same itt ail A g a . . . nothing c m corne to puss. but some Precedenr of the like Nature hus already huppen il.""

History is "'a Prospect-Glass" reveal ing analogical images of ourselves: "It

infornrs the Understunding by the Memor-y. and he(ps irs to judge of what will huppen by shewing

us the like Revulutions in fonner Times" (1: 113)? Similady. Pierre LE Moyne noted that "since.

as the Wise Man says, nothing is new under the Sun. a Lemed and Judicious Reader may Ieam to foretell the future by the past; and regulate what he has to do. by what has been done" (45)?

The exemplary approach to history sounds. as Dustin Griffin notes. "remarkably like the theory of satire advanced at h e sarne tirne by Dryden and his followers":" however. this view of

a cyclical. recurrent pattern to human events informs ail seventeenth-century writing. Annabel Patterson's discussion of Mamell's method of "detining that transitional moment of history" in his poems on Cromwell applies: "It depends on prcsenting both the old and the new. the 'ancient rights' and the necessary revolution . . . . it is also irnplied that history hüs seen such contrasts

'' In [Pierre Le Lorrain. Abbe de Vallemont]. D~tctorHistoric~is.ed. T . Heame. 2nd ed.. 2 vols. (London. 1705) 1: 1 13. See Samuel Daniel's suggestion that "the universall notions of the affayres of men . . . in al1 ages beare the same resemblances. and are measured by one and the same foote of understanding" Letter to Lord Cnnboume. 1605. Coniplere Works. cd. Alexander B. Grosart. 5 vols. (London, 1885-96) 4: liii-liv. See also Cecil C. Scronsy. "The Doctrine of Cyclical Recurrence and Somc Related Ideas in the Work of Samuel Daniel." SP 54 (1957): 387307 and Paul Fussell. The Rheroricul Worll of Aiigustcrn Hiimrinis~n(Oxford: Clarendon. 1965) esp. 54-69. 25

Hearne's image suggests a parailel with conventional descriptions of satire as a minor. See also Le Moyne 41-42. Heamc is quoting Dryden's "Life of Plutarch."

" This cyclical theory of history competed with both older eschatological approaches and progressivist views of history. but these could be reconciled: sec Tuveson 1 16 and pnssii?~.For a discussion of theones of progress. see R. S. Crane, "Anglican Apologetics and the Idea of Progress, 169%1745,"MP 3 I (1934): 273-306.349-82

" Surire: A Criricol Reintrodrrction ([Lexington]: UP of Kentucky. 1994) 124.

before, and absorbed them."" History w u not the propeny only of conservativcs: indition could. paradoxically, be used to justify a break from the past If Tories used historical constitutionaIism to support their views. Whigs could counter with their own historical myth. the "Norman Yoke." which claimed that the natural processes of history had already been distoned by

the suppression of Saxon Iibert~.'~If Roydists iooked to the court of Augustus for models. ndicals adored the republicanism of Cicero. Cato. and Brutus.-'o The publication of an important Tory history like that of Clarendon in 1702-04 was for bis reason a political event as well as a historiographical one: every new reading of the past had potentiai implications for the present and

"Against Polarization: Literature and Politics in Marvell's Cromwell Poems." ELR 5 (1975): 254. Historical interpretation was. of course. ideological: as A. H. de Quchen notes of lheological scholarship. "most seventeenth-century aniiquÿnans were looking to the p u t Ior some sort of doctrinal support" (94). Whig reaction to Dryden's The Dukr of Guise. which paralleled the French Catholic League with the Exclusionists. demonstrated that historical precedents çould fit opposing ideologies: Thomas Shadwell. in his Sonle Reflections upon rhr Prerenrled Purallei in the Play called 7he Duke of Guise (London. 1683) reported that the play had originally been intended "to expose that unpardlel'd Villany of the Pupisrs in the most homd Pcirisicin Masscicre." but that Dryden "poisons and perverti' the play's original "good Intentions" (2).

See Lucy Hutchinson's account of the Conquest in hcr "Autobiographical Fragment." Menloirs of the Life of Colonel Hirtchinson. ed. James Sutherland (London. New York. and Toronto: Oxford UP. 1973) 280. and Christopher Hill. "The Norman Yoke." Piiritrrnism cind Rewlution. 1958 (London: Penguin. 1 9 0 ) 58- 125; for its poctic ernploymenl. see Oldham's "The Thirteenth Satire of Juvenai. Imiüited." 11.6 1-88. and John Tutchin's An Heroick Porni upon the Lare Expedition of His Majesty (London. 1689). '9

'O The classical republicanism of writers like Harrington and Sidney informcd much of the satire of the period: see Zera S. Fi&. The Classical Repirbliccrns (Evanston. Ill.. 1962). Blair Worden. "Classical Republicanism and the Puritan Revolution." Histop and Imiginurion, eds. Hugh Lloyd-Jones. Vderie Pearl. and Blair Worden (London: Duckworth. 198 1) 182-20. M. L. Clarke, The Noblest Romun. gen. ed. H.H. Scullard. Apects of Greek and Roman Lilè (London: Tharnes and Hudson. 1981) 91-95. Howard Erskine-Hill. The Augustcr/~Ideci ilz E~rglish Literatrrre (London: Edward Arnold. 1983) 198-2 12. and Malcolm Smuls, "Court-Ccntred Politics and the Uses of Roman Historians. c. 1590- 1630." in Sharpc and Lake. eds.. Qilrnrr und Poiitics 30 and passim.

future?' It is. in part, the fact that we today have lost this sense of a recumcnt. ciernally significant history that makes it so difticult for us to reclaim the satires of the past: however successful an aesthetic creation we rnay tind Dryden's representation of Shaftesbury in Absaluni and

Achirophrl. the portrait does not have the sarne kind of signiticance for us t h a ~Juvend's Sejanus did for the seventeenth-century." The impact upon satire of suçh ii loss is dnmatic. for. regardless of whether its intent is to provoke revolution or reaction. satire's moral attitude to the present is alrnost invariably conservative. Ia normative values -- whether the cautious sobriety of the Norman conquerors, or the quasi-republican liberty of the Saxons -- are to k found Iargely in

a lost p s t . One major modem historical school does. however. retain something of this lost sense of cyclical history. of patterns with a direct application io the presenc it is hardly a coincidence that it is Marxist critics who have been at the forefront of recent historicist approaches to liierary criticism. Marxist analysis is predicated upon a faith in the recurring mechanisms of history. an economic dialectic at work. in different guises. through ail ages: Marxists (and their kin. the New Historicists and Cultural Materidisis) have kept faith with the idea that the study of the liieraturc

" Abel Boyer's comments on Temple's Introduction tu the Hiszot? in Mrinoirs of the Lifr and Negotiurions of Sir W. Temple. 2nd ed. (London. 17 15) that ii had becn published " both to compliment" William LI1 "under the Chut-ucterof the Nor-niun Conqueror." and "to assert the late Revulurion" hy reference to historicaf precedent (413). Swift's own unlinished "History ot' England" simibrly reveals. according to Irvin Ehrenpniis. Whiggish sympathies: sec "Swift's History of England." JEGP 5 1 (1952): 18 1.

'' An indication of changing attitudes is Bolingbroketsdiscussion of the limits of exemplary history in his Lettem on the Stuïfy and Use of Hisror?. 2 vols. (London. 1752) 57-70: the defeated general who. following ancient example. comrnitted suicide. "might p u s for a hero. but 1 am sure he would pass for a madman" (Letter 3. Sect. 2: 1 : 63). See Nadel 69-73.

of the past is irnmediately relevant and useful." "The most important work" in litera-y studies. wnte the editors of the L987 collection nie New Eighteenth-Cenrury. "always insists on the relations between idcology. gender. race. and çlass. and on the hnctions of the oppressed and excluded in tex& and cultud formations."" Why? Because thesc are the most pressing issues of

Our m n day: this is modernization applied as an interprerive svütegy. An intcresting c a x in point is Laun Brown's recent study of ideology. gender. and mercantile capitalisrn. Ends of

Empire: Women and Idrology in Eurly Eightrrnth-Crntio~English Litrt-mit-r ( 1993): its inteni. Brown writes. is to "uncover the opentions of imperialism in the eighteenlh century and to help put a stop to empire in the twentieth?

Brown's employment of an anachronistic term like

"hpenalism" -- and indeed. of a nineteenth-century histoticaVeconomic theory likc Marxism -- in

the service of an analysis of the England of Behn. Addison. Swift. and Pope rctlects a vcry seventeenth-ceniury hith in the unchanging patterns OC hislory. Dryden would doubtless quaire1 with her interpretations of these patterns. but hc would havc no diftkulty with her pcrspcctive on

" This failh cm lead to a point where "litcraturc." as a distinct discoursc. no longer exists: "liteniy studies" becomes ideological or historical analysis. See for example Terry Eagleton. Litermy Theory: An Introduction. 1983 (Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1986)206.

" Felicity Nussbaum and Laura Brown, "Revising Critical Prüctices: An Inuoductory Essay," n i e New Eighreenth-Centu~?(New York and London: Methuen. 1987) 70. IL is interesting to note the absence of religion from this triad of contextual conccms: Phillip Harth makes an important point when h e notes that. while "politics and religion were more closely intertwined in the seventeenth century than in most other periods." the "movement of inlluence was usually from religion to politics. and seldom in the opposite direction." Contexts of Dpxielrn's niought (Chicago and London: U of Chicago P. 1968) 228. James Harrington's The Corninonweulth of Oceunu ( 1656) provides an obvious seventeenth-century analogue to Marxism: Harrington's economic analysis of the causes of the Great Rebellion has made him a central figure in the Marxist approach of Christopher Hill: sce Piiriranism and Revol~rrion289-302. 25

Ends of Empire (Ithaca and London: Corncll UP. 1993) 1.

history -- or with her polemical intent Marxisrn. however. has abandoned the individual. for only classes. races. and genders react predictably enough to be oc use to economiç determini~rn.'~This unwillingncss to account for the individual voice is a liability in the study of satire. which presents itself always as an expressive genre. as the individuai enunciation of cornplaint. We apprehend satire as we would a murder mystery. for, whatever our attitude to the victim. the fact of the death is not. in itself, enough: we want to know who pulled the tngger. Agcncy seerns vitiilly important satire provokes biographical speculaùons bccause it is about perspective: the satiriç insight. the attitude of the speaker, is the rcsult OC looking at a particular subject from a paniçular angle. In this sense. the satirist who detines the satiric object is simuItaneously detining him or herself. We follow the

sight lines backward. tricing them to the point OS origin: reading a satire upon the Whigs. we register the information that the satirist is a Tory. In a broad scnsc. satire is metonymic ([or metaphor represents precisely the kind of "disguise" tha~satire is designed KI penetrate): it insists upon connections. between cause and et'rect. art and lik. creation and creator.

Satire allows us to "see"ourselves and others lrom an unfamiliar penpcctive." It offers a

''

Modem Marxist readings of seventeenih-century texts tend also to ignore gencnc bounds: see for example Steven N. Zwicker's Lines of Authoriry (Ithaca and London: Comell UP, 1993) 9- 12. Satire has been particularly ill-served by Marxist criticism: il is perhaps significant that in Michael McKeon's "HistoricizingAbsulo~nund Achirophcl" (New Eighrrrilth Century 23-40). the word "satire" appears just twicc (24.39). Defamiliarization is too gencral a term to describe the paniculür distortions of satire. Better is Wolfgang Kayser's notion of the grotesque. defined as an "estranged" or "alienated" world. that is actudly our own world uansfomcd. The Grotesque in Art and Literutwr. 1957. Trans. Ulrich Weisstein (New York: McGraw-Hill. 1966) 184. See also Arthur Clayborough. The Grotesque NI English Literurure. 1965 (Oxford: Clarendon. 1967) 103-07 and Leonard Fcinberg, An Introduction to Sritire. 1967 (Aines. IO: Iowa State UP. 1972) 63-72. "

claritïed vision, wherein shades ol grey dissolve to revcai the sharp outlines of vicc and virtuc. "Al1 this," Maynard Mack has written. "results [rom a slant of the glass. a tictional perspective on the real world."''

But if satire allows us to "see." it does so by refriction or distortion. Salire is

frequently described as a mirror. but it is morc tmthfully a medium t h m r ~ hrather . than in which we perceive the objects of redity." The distinction underlines the importance o r the satirist. who is the source of the satiric perspective. In this sense. the persona1 and topical qualities of satire imply each other. for the satirist's vision enhances elhical insight by limiring u s to a single subjective perspecti~e.~'Satire is topical and occasional precisely because i t opcrütcs through the subjective distortions of a particular person in a particular place wriiing kom a unique perspective with a specitïc ideological or polemical purposc. In facl. satire's point of ongin is frequcntly unknowable: the majonty of seventeenth-century satires are. and will likely remain. anonymous or of doubtful attribution." Others are the products of collective composition: bccausc so many

'' "The Muse of Satire." YR 41 (195 1): 85:

sec also Joseph Bentley. "Scmmtiç Gravitation: An Essay on Satiriç Reduction." MLQ 30 ( 1969):esp. 14-19. Thc 3rd Earl ol' Shaftesbury's use of ridicule as test of Truth is predicated upon its liinction as "one of thosc principal Lights or natural Mediums. by which Things arc to be view'd." "An Essay on the Freedom of Wit and Humour." Charmterisricks of Men, Mmners, Opinions, Tinws. 2nd cd. (London, 1714) 61.

See John Marston's disingenuous muernent that satire's "squint-ey'd sight I Could strike the worlds deformities so right." In fact, "squint-eyed sight" pmdrces deforrnity. "Satyre 2," The Metamorphosis of Pigrnulions Iinuge. And Crrtliine Sntyes (London. 1598) 40. "

As C. F. Main points out. the "very act of at~ckingonly one viçc in satire is a simplification." "The Right Vein of Rochester's Smy-."John Wilr~iut,E d ofRochuster-: Criticnl Essays. ed. David M. Vieth (New York and London: Garland, 1988) 234.

' See Mirth Diverts AI1 Cure (London. 1708) sig. [A2']. and Paul Hammond's "Anonymity in Restora~ionPoetry." K e n t 8 (1993): 13342. Persona1 Iarnpoons werc particularly likely to be anonymous; see however "Advice Or an Heroic Epistle to MI Fra: Villiers," which daringly concludes, "And so 1 end I Your faithful friend / And Servant -- 1 Roger

satires were distributed in manuscript, new hands frequently added stanzas to ballad lampoons. or new lines to formai verse satires.'" Nonethcless. the satires themselves encourage us to consrrucr

an image of the s a t i r i s ~ ' Such ~ was precisely the method of nineteenth- and early twcntiethcenturies critics of satire. with frequently disastrous consequences: had Pope not been "crippled." wrote Humbert Wolfe in 1929. he had not written satire? Reading characier from thc satires. critics consmicted rnonstrous versions of satirists: Lytton Strachey's characterization in 1925 of

Martin." BL MS Harl. 73 19 f. 141"; Wilson 1 17-20. Martin was a notorious libeller: sec "To Julian," BL M S Harl, 69 13 f- 15lr, and "Letter to Julian." BL MS Harl. 73 19 f. 173': Wilson 13137. " See Harold Love. Scribd Publicution in Sriwmenrh-Crntw-y Engimtl( OxCurd: Clarendon. 1993) esp. 23 1-83 and Jean de La Bruyère. The Churucter. or the Mmnet-s ofthe Agr (London. 1699) 7. Rochester's "Signior Dildo" exists in numerous statcs. with a wide variety of possible stanzas that were probably added by others; sec Love's "A Restoration Lmpoon in Transmission and Revision: Rochester's(?) 'Signior Dildo." SB 46 ( 1993): 250-62. Selfcensorship by scribes also crealed variants: see Paul Hammond. "Censorship in thc Manuscript Transmission or Restoration Poctry." E&S 46 ( 1993): 39-62. Sec also "An Essay of Scandal" (168 1). whiçh switches fsom heroic couplets to hudibrastics midwüy through thc pocm. This. like so many other lampoons, is an unstructurcd satincd cataioguc to which ncw names. and ncw scandals. may be added ad infinirwn by later satirists. BL MS Harl. 73 19, ff.68'-70': Wilson 6367.

'' S e for example John Aubrey's association of samucl Butler's salirical wit with his personality 1: 138. Charles A. Knight notes that the "satinc speakers of Horacc and Juvenal rnay be in part a fiction . . . but we tend to use those speakers as authorial images onto which we c m project what we take to be the author's intentions." "Satire, Speech and Genre." CL 44 ( 1992): 24. Seventeenth-century readers icndcd to attribue anonymous satires to well-known satirists: it is difficult to establish reliable canons for Cleveland. Butler. Marvell. Rochester. Buckingham. Dorset and others because much that was spurious works was published under their names. Sec the debate over the Second and Thitd Advice to- a Puiritet. in George deForest Lord. "Two Ncw Poems by MarvelI?" BNYPL 62 (1958): 55 1-70. Ephim G. Fogel's response in "Salmons in Both, or Some Caveats for Canonical Schoiars." BNYPL 63 ( 1959): 223-36. and Lord. "Commcnts on the Canonical Caveat," BNYPL 63 (1959): 355-66. See also ARP 3-56 and A. H. de Quehen, "An Account of Works Attributcd to Samuel Butler," RES N.S. 33 (1982): 262-77. "Satire," Criterion 9 ( 1929-30):9.

Pope as the "little monster of Twit'nam." and of his satires as "spoonsful of boiling oil. ladled out by a tïendish monkey ai an upstairs window upon such of the passers-by whom the wretch had a grudge against" is chara~teristic.~~ New Cnticism seems. in hindsight, an unlikely champion for satire. Its Iiterary values are frequently profoundly opposed to those of the seventeenth- and cighteenth-century: cven its formalism. with its emphasis upon ambiguity. was of a son alien to the carlier pcriod." Perhaps.

as Phiilip Harth has suggested, the New Critics "showed particular zeal in applying the impersonal theory of poetry" to apparently personal poems like satires "because the more intractable the material. the greater the triumph in bnnging it to bay?'

Brucc King's rernarks on Abscilo/?iand

Achitophrl are typical: "our knowledge of the poem's poli tical occasion m isdirects Our response

away from its imaginative pattern~."~"ing does not dcny the pocrn's topicality: he merely renders it irrelevant. Topicality em bamsed the New Critics because it denies that any givcn poem can "mean" the same things in different histoncal ~ o n t c x i s .R. ~ ~S. Crane's perceplive

Pope (Cambridge: Cambridge UP. 1925) 1-2. For a more sympathctic hiographical reading of satire. see Gilbert Cannan. Surire (New York: George H. Doran. 19 14).

See for example Cleanth Brooks' cornplaint that neoclassical poets "scgrcgaui" ~ h e "satiric impulse" irom "other impulses." making "neoclassical satire. too narrowly satiric." 36

Modern Poeay and the Tradition (Chape1 Hill: U of North Carolina P. 1939) 230. See also Wallace CabIe Brown, "Dramatic Tension in Neoclassic Satire," CE 6 ( 1944-45): 263-69. "

"The New Criticism and Eighteenth-Century Poeuy." CI 7 (198 1): 53 1.

" "Absalom und Achitophel:

A Revaluation." D~ylen'sMhd nnd Art. ed. Bruce King

(Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1969) 65. 19

See Reuben A. Brower's inlluential article. "An Allusion to Europe: Dryden and Tradition" ELH 19 ( 1952): 38-48. which pnises Absulo,tz and Achitophrl as an occasional piecc that is nonetheless "poetry of a high order" (40); "Minor Augustan poetry is dcad for modern readers not because it was too 'general.' but because it was too local" (47).

18

comment that New Cnticism reduced al1 p o e q to "on-ucror-(London. 1673)42.

76 Satiric inherirance, Rubeluis ro Sterne (Princeton: Princeton UP. 1979) 10: Seidel is citing Freud's comments on the psychology of satire in 7he Inte~pretrrtionof Drerims.

27 Histoncist approaches neglect the roie of the artist. treating satire as an impcrsonal expression of ideology, with the result that the subjective quality of satiric insight. and the problems this creates for the satirist, are overfooked. Fonnalist criticism devotes Iittle attention to the historical context that shapes both the satirist's rhetorical strmgies and the audience's responses. ruid tends. as a result. to treat satire as though it were something clse. This study therefore seeks to mediatc between biographicd. formalist and historicist approaches to satire. My approach is Iounded. t k t . upon a recognition of the putative polemical function of satire. and. second. upon an

acknowledgment of the apparently personal quality of the satinc utterance as a characteristic

eflect of the genre. The tïrst of these necessitates an engagement with historicist criticism. and the second. with the effect of persond (Le. "biographical")voice; at the same timc. my interest in both of these areas is formalist. insofar as both topicality and persona1 voice arc a function of the genre itself. The greatest part of what follows. howevcr. is an analysis of the evasive rhetorical strategies that satinsts ernploy as a response to the stresses upon the genre. Evasion can

necessitare creativc suategies: as the 3rd Earl of S haliesbury noted in h is Chri~-crctrristic~ks, "Tis the persecuting Spirit has rais'd the bnnrenng one" (72). So too did the sütirist's rhctot-ical evasions produce innovative Sorms that enriched. and indeed. helped define the gcnt-e.

A few words need to be said about my choice of historical period. Periodicization

produces arbitrary distinctions that are as clumsy the word itself. and 1 do not by my choice of this sixty-year time span aim to replace older categones such as "Restontion." with a ncw. equally arbitrary one. The years from 1640 to 1700 do. however. represcnt a signiiïcant cpoch in the history of satire. for it was with the adveix of civil war thar topicality became the dominant mode

28 of literary satire; e q u d y . with the development of a more structured. theoreticdly cohcrent "neoclassicism" in the early decades of the eighteenth-century. topicality. whilr ncvcr disappearing. was incniasingly viewed as a liability. an undesinble elernent in a genre thai was seeking recognition as a legitimate poetic lorm in its own right. Because satire was a its most topical in the pet-iod that 1 have chosen. the satires of this era revcal morc çlcarly than in any other period the stresses between the panicular and the general. the topical and the universal. the personal and the impersonal. For this reason. my approach is both synchronic and diachronie. 1 am panicularly intcrested in the îëatures thar the satires of this 60 year period hold in cornmon; moreoever. because satire is always to sorne cxtcnt topical and didactic. muçh of what 1 have to say about the genre in the later seventeenth-century applies to al1 satire. At the same time. no study of satire that is concerned with its relationship to extemal evenrs can avoid an acknowledgement of the ways in which historïcal change impaçted upon the gcnrc: the outhreak of civil war. the execution of Charles 1. the Restorauon. the Dutch Wars. and the Glorious

Revolution had a vital effect upon the way in which satire was written within thc pcriod thüt 1 discuss. and the effects of these hisioricai developments arc treated in some detail in thc chapters that follow. As benchmarks. 1640 and 1700 are themselvcs entirely arbitrary. and I have fclt free to touch upon the satire of both earlier and later pcriods whenever it scrmcd usclùl

LO do

so.

My decision to concentrate upon verse satire is similarly motivatcd. Poetry in ~ h e seventeenth-century was a serious business. and was creditcd üs the most elTectivc medium of literary communication: it was not by accident that Milton. seeking to justilj. the ways of God to men, chose to do so in an epic poem. Again. however. 1 have not hesitaied io discuss prose or dramatic satire where it sccmed informative to do so. Neither have I rcstricted mysclf to "formal

verse satire." in large part because I do not believe that such a catcgory uuly existed until Dryden Uivented it in his seminal "Discourse Conceming the Original and Progress of Satire" in 1693." This lack of a strict detinition for the genre through much of the later seventeenth-çcntury means that a great deal of the most important satin: of the period is modal rathcr than generic. and

occurs within narrative pocms like Absuiom and Achitophrl: 1 am more intercstcd in exploring the characteristic features of the satinc impulse than in creating largdy artiliçial and anachronistic distinctions. As weli. the genetic verse sarire of the penod is immensely varieci. and there is a great deal of overlap between f o r m ~ . ' ~ Ballad satires. so immenscly important h m thc 1640s on.

are a case in point. and encornpass a broad range of thematiç structures, the satiric song. the mock-litany. the ironic prosopoprpiu and the "Sessions" poem k i n g but a few." Some forms defy classification. as. for example. "A Bill on St. Paul's Church Door" ( 1642:'). an artiick on Isaac

77

See Dryden's "Discourse" for his discussion of "how a Modem Satire shou'd hc made"

(78-84). and his classification of Mac Flecknoe and A 6.scrlo111 crnd Achitophel as " Vw~n~ricrn" satire (48). Employing a delinition denved from Dryden's. Mary Claire Randolph. in "Thc Structural Design of the Formal Vcrse Satire." PQ 2 1 ( 1942). w u able to idenduy only thrce English practitioners of the genre: Donne. Young. and Popc (383). "'or a discussion of the variety of satinc foms in the period. sce Harold F. Brooks. "English Verse Satire. 1640-1660: Prolegomena." SCrnr 3 ( 1988): 17-46; sec ais» Charles A. Knight. "Imagination's Cerbems: Satire and the Melaphor of Genre." PQ 69 ( 1990): 131-51.

'' For songs. see Hyder E. Rollins. "Martin Parker. Ballad-Monper." MP 16 ( 19 19): 1 13138, "Martin Parker: Additional Notes." MP 19 (1931): 77-8 1. and his Ccrwrlirr mtl Puritcm (New York: New York UP. 1923). Sce also Claude M. Simpson. The British Brucrdsicle BuIlcd and its Music (New Brunswick and New Jersey: Rutgers UP. 1966). For cxamples of the litüny. which Brooks cails "the most popular tom of al1 for ballad-satires" (sec "English Vcrse Satire" 25-26.34-51). see Runtp Songs 1: 160-65 and 2: 177-89. Thomas Jordan's "A Letany Delivered. Jan. 1 1659 to a Friend as a New-Years Gift." A Royd Arbor of Lqwl Porsir (London. [ i 6631) 26-27. The True Prorrstcrnts Lirm! ([London]. 1680). Tite b y l Letctri~([London. 168 11). T. D.. A New Littunu. . .for rhr Imtrciction of the Whiggs (London. 1684). and The b y u l Mun's Letan y (London, 1685). A good discussion of the "Sessions" poem is the in traduction io A ~ o u m ~ l f i oParnosars. m ed. Hugh Macdonald (London. P. J. Dobell. 1937) vii-xii.

Penington prinied in the important 1662 collection of Royalist satire. Riînip S ~ n ~ . s : ' ~ THis House is to be let. It is both wide. and fair; If you would know the pricc of it. P n y ask of Mr. Maior. Isacick Prnningron (Rionp Songs 1 : 115)

My approach has been deliberalely eclectic. and 1 have tried to examine as broad a range of satinc modes as possible. These lorms do irnply important distinctions. but 1 am most interested in those features rhat these forrns hold in cornmon. For this reason. as well. 1 make some use of pnnted and manuscript miscellanies liom h c period:" a comprehensive vicw or the thousands of satires produced in this period would require a Iàr longer study than mine. hut I have attempted to deal with a representative sampling of the variety of forrns in order to dcmonstrate that the issues that 1 examine arc endemic to the genrc itsel f. and not just to thc heuér-known works of tigures like Cleveland. Mamell. Dryden. Rochester. and Oldham. Whilc t h e x satirists

constitute an important part of my study. a broader examination o l the lcss wcll known verse satire of the period places their achievements in context. reminding us. as Higden rcmarkcd. that "the H~rmourand particu kir Hinrs of the Titlies" wherein it was written "is irrtit.t.tl rltr Lifr and Bea~iïyof Satyr."

'' See however M. C. Randolph. "'Hide-and-Se&'

Satires of the Rcstoration and XVIIICentury," N&Q 183 (1942): 2 13-16. Peningion was twice Lord Mayor (in 16-41and 1643): he was a frequent mget of satirists. the "wicked. debauched Shagamuffins." of the King's Party. Sec A Complaim to the House of Comntons (Oxford. l642) sig. [B2'].

'' The importance of such manuscript miscellanies has only recently b a n rccognized:

For

a discussion of dieir production. see W. J. Cameron. "A Late Scventeenth-Century Scriptoriurn." RMS 7 (1963): 25-52. Mary Hobbs. "Early Seventeenh-Century Verse Miscellanies and Their Value for Textual Editors." EMS 1 ( 1989): 182-2 10. and Michael Brennan and Paul Hammond. "The Badminton Manuscript: A New Miscellany of Resioration Verse." EMS 5 ( 1995): 17 1-2O7.

Chapter 1 "Criminal Delight" : Satine Polemic and Voice

When the anti-Papist. an ti-irish mock ballad Lilli burlero ( probabiy penned by Thomas Wharton and Sung to a tune associated with Henry Purcell)' tïrst appeared in late October of 1688. it achieved instant popularity. The ballad. written in mock-brogue. deiailed a planned

uprising by the Irish troops serving James in England. to be led by Ihc unpopular Richard Talbot the Catholic Earl of Tyrconnel. and Viceroy of Ireland:

Ho by my Shoul it is a T----r. Lilli Burlero, [Buiien a-la;] And he will Cut dl de English Troat. Lilli [Burlero Bullen a-la], Lero. Laro, [Laro Lero. Lilli Burlero Bullen a la]. Lero. Laro. [ L a o Lero, Lilli Burlero Bullen a la].: As the tune disseminated diroughout the country. William of Orange's lleet was already sailing

towards Tor Bay: for Imes. Lilli burlero çould not have appeared at a worse tirne. According to Gilbert bu me^ the tune "made an impression on the Army. that cannot be well imagined by those who saw it not The whole Army. and a[ last al1 people both in city and country. were singing it perpetually. And perhaps never had so slight a h i n g so great an effcct" (Bumet 1 :

' See Jonalhan Keates. Purcell: A Biogruphu (London: Chatto and Windus. 1995) 192. William Chappell. Bailod Lirerature and Popular Music of the Olden T h e (London: Chappell and Co. 1859) 2: 568-74 and Simpson 449-55. As Maureen Duffy notes. it "isalmost cenainly not a Purcell composition but one he set." H e n y Purcell (London: Founh Estate Ltd.. 1994) 151.

' A New Song ([London]. [1688]): POAS Yulr 4: 3 1 1- 12.

Words in square brackets replace "&c."in the original. and have been transcribed from the first verse.

792).' Clearly the tune did have a remarkable impact. palvanizing support for William. and

inflaming the always-present hatred and fear of Irish Püpists: Lilli burlero did not cause James' downfall. but it did provide his opponents wih a powerful symbol. a popular means of aniculaung feus of Papist tyranny. There is a marked reluctance on the pan of twentierh-century critics to accede that satire has the power to effect reform. "For p o e u y makes nothing happen." wrote W. H. Auden. one of

our own century's most prominent verse s a t i r i s ~ .The ~ reasons t'or this pessimistic evaluation are

as various as the critical approaches of the critics who express it: J. W. Nichols. noting the lack o f evidence for satire's effectiveness as a tool of rdorm. argues that iü "essential airns and eîYectsw must therefore be found elsewhere (3 1): sirnilx is Paul EIkin's uniformitarian contention that

satire fails "because neither human nature nor society is capable of human chângc."' Formalist approaches ignore utility in their pursuit of structure and device. or view the satirist's depictions of evil as ar~hetypal;~ psychological criticism. on the olher hand. takes a darker view of the

'

Wharton himself boasted that it "sung a. deludcd Pnnçe ou[ of Thrcc Kingdoms." See [Delarivière Manley?]. A T'me Relation of the Sriwal Focrs r m l Cix~riurancrsof the Innnded Rior and Tunzult of Quern E1i;ubetlr's Birrh-dqv (London. 17 1 1 ) 5. Thomas Percy wrote that the ballad "hadonce o nlore poir*e@ulrffrct thun eitllrr the Philipics of Dtwiostlirnrs. or Cicero; and contributrd nor a little toit-urk the greut 1-eidurion in 1688." Rcliqtrrs of Ancienr English Poetq, 3 vols. (London. 1765) 2: 358,

' "In Memory of W. B. Yeats" (1939). Collecred Poe~ns.1976. cd. Edward Mendelson (New York: Vintage International, 195)1) 248. 5

n i e Augusran Defence of Satire (Oxford: Clarendon. 1973) 84.

See for example Jewel Spears Brooker's comment that Northrop Frye's derinition of satire as "wit or humour" with "an object of attack" is built upon satiric technique. and ornits any mention of satiric purpose; see "Satire and Dualism." 7llulin 5 ( 1983):7. and Ancrrunp of Criticisin.1957 (Pnnceton: Pnnceton UP. 197 1) 224. Employing a vaguely archetypal approach. 6

Philip Pinkus opines that "reform" is not "the purpose of any satire. insofar as the targer is etemal.

satirist's motivation. which it relates to deeply-buried aiavistic impulses.' David Nokes h a even

suggested that satire acts as a verbal subsrirure for moral and political action." If it is difficult to find examples of satire's direct impact upon historical evcnts. ir is easier

to demonstrate that personal satire did wound its victims. even if it failed to retom them. As Addison wrote in Specturor 23 (March 27. 17 1 1). the tact that "the Wounds" satire pives "are only Imaginary." does Little to alleviate the pain if the darnage is accepted as real: "how many are there that would not nlher lose a considerable Sum of Mony. or evcn LilS it self. ihan be set up as a Mark of Infamy and ~erision?"' Buckingham's well-known larnent for the damage done to his reputation by the portrait of Zimri in Absalom und Achitophrl provides rare insight into the personal effects of lampoon: As witches images of wax invent

To torture those theyr bid to Represent. And as the mie live substance do's drcay Whilst thar slight ldoll melts in tlarnes away Such. & no lesser witchcnfi wounds rny n a m e So thy il1 made Resemblance wasts rny f m e .

the Manichean evil principle. the dragon." "Satire and St. George." QQ 70 ( 1963,):13. See also Pinkus' "The New Satire of Augustan England." UTQ 38 ( 1969): 136-58. 7

Joseph Bentley suggests out that "wit. rather than mord purpose. is the primary difference between satiric and sadistic acts." "Satire and the Rhetoric of Sadism." CenrR 1 1 (1967): 402; see also Alvin Keman. "Aggressionand Salire: Art Considered as a Form of Biological Adaptation." Lireran 7 h e o e and Srrucrure. eds. Frank Brady. John Palmer. and Martin Pnce (New Haven and London: Yale UP. 1973) 115-29 8

Raille? and Rage (Brighton: Harvester P Ltd.. 1987) 17: s t x also Michael Seidel. "CrisisRhetoric and Satinc Power" NLH 20 (1988): 166. An exception to this genenl rule is Edward A. and Lillian D. BIoom's Sutire's Persuasire Vuice (Ithaca and London: Corne11 C'P. 1979): satire effects "a gradua1 mon1 reawakening. a reaffirmation of positive social and individual values" ( 17). 9

The Specrator. ed. Donald F . Bond (Oxford: Clarendon. 1965) 1: 97.

So as the charrned brmd consumd ith' tire So did Meleagers vital1 heat expire. t Poor name! w medicine for thee can 1 tinde But thus with suonger charms. thy charme t'unbinde'? (Buckingham 168) Buckingham's comments beiie Dryden's suggestion that he "was too witty to resent it as an injury" ("Discourse" 7 1). Indeed. if satire is to reform. it must be treated by the victim. if not as an "injury." then at l e s t as a Friendly waming. Buckingham. however. recognized little tmth in the satiric portrait. and deterrnined upon poetic revenge rather than refomi.'* If the attack on Buckingham was intended to instruct its victim. it was scarcely a success. Nor. indeed. did Absalom and Achirophel bring about drmatic politicai change: the hope expressed in Absalon's IX Wor-thies (1682) that "Thy Lines will make young Absolon relent. / And though 'tis hard Achitophel repent," remained unrealized." Its major impact was instead to blacken the reputation of its victims pemanently. In this. satire frequently succeeds: Dryden was called Bayes for decades dter hc w u pilloried in The Rcherirsril; Mulgrwe. moçked as "Bajazet"

'O The nature of this revenge is uncertain: Anthony à Wood (2: 805) clairned that Buckingham "wrote, or caus'd to be wrote" Poericcil Reflectiuns on [i Late Porm Enrituled, Absalom and Achitophei (London. 168l), but Christine Phipps doubts the attribution: see Buckingham 26 1-62. The aspect of caricature that appears in Dryden's characters denves in part from the Theophrastan c haracter upon such verse portraits: see Mark Van Doren. John D y l e n . 1920 (Bloornington: Indiana UP. 1960) 149-60: for the relation OF the character to verse satire. see Benjamin Boyce's The Theophrastan Character in England to 1642 (Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1947) esp. 91-97. 168-73. his The Polernic Char-ucter, 1640-1661. 1955 (New York: Octagon Books. 1969) esp. 1 15-23, and Robert W. McHenry Jr.'s discussion of the character of "Shirnei." in "Dryden's History: The Case of Slingsby Bethel." HLQ 47 (1984): 253-72.

Absolon's IX Wot-!hies (London. 168 1/2). See Phillip Harth's reading of the poem's purpose in "Legends No Histones: The Case of Absalon1 rind Achitophel." SECC 4 ( 1975): 13"

29.

by Etherege and Rochester. was still associated with this name almost 30 years later." Dryden's

caricature of Shadwell in Mcic FIecknor is another example." But if our own responses to such

as Shadwell are inevitably condiùoned by the damage intlicted by Dryden. there is. at hest. slight evidence that the victims themselves changed their conduct. or that othcrs look example from them. and refomed. Any determination of the effectiveness of satire thus depends. to a great extent, on how we define "effective"; it is particularly important to identify the intended audience of the satire. We are no[ surprised that Buckingham did not "leam" anything about himself from Dryden's Zimri. yet seventeenth-century satirists. as we shall sec. routincly claimeci that thcir satiric attacks were intended to persuade the wicked to r e f ~ m i . 'As ~ Dryden remarks in the prefatory "To the Reader" of Absalom and Achitophel. " The rrue end of Satyre. is the nmendrnenr

of Vices by correction" ( 5 ) .and it is his expressed hope that Shafiesbury. and indced. "the Devi1

" See "Ephelia to Bajazet" ( I675?), The Porms of Sir Gmrgr Etheregr. ed. James Thorpe (Princeton: Princeton UP. 1963) 9-10. " A Very Heroical Epistle in Answer to Ephelia" (1676?), Rochester 1 12- 14. and William Shippen's Modrrution Displrfd, 2nd rd. (London. 1705) 1 1 ; POAS Yale 7 : 19-42.

'' See Walter Raleigh. Sonie Aurhot-s (Oxford: Oxford UP. 1923) 170. Albert Bogman laments that "Dryden's satirical lines . . . have given Shadwell an unenviable rcputation." Thon~us Shadwell, His Lifr and Conierlies. 1928 (New York: Benjamin Blorn. 1969) v-vi. See however John Dennis' defence of Shadwell in The Chamctrrs und Condiicr of Sir John Edgcir ( 1720), The Critical Works of John Dennis. ed. Edward Niles Hooker. 2 vols. (Baltimore: John Hopkins P. 1939) 2: 20 1. Don R. Kunz's "Shadwell and his Critics: n i e Misuse or Dryden's Mac Flecknor," RECTR 12 (1973): 14-27 and Kirk Combe's "'But Loads of Sb----- Almost Choked the Way': Shadwell, Dryden, Rochester, and the Sumrner of 1676." TSLL 37 ( 1995): 126-64. Another victirn was Flecknoe, who has, solely through the agency of Mac Flrcknor. been identified as Irish: see for example Hugh Walker 160. and Guy Linton Diffenbaugh. The Rise and Deialopmenr of the Mock Heroic Poem in England (Urbana: U of Illinois P. 1926) 20.

'" CC "Satyr" (1680): satire is "charity to Foes kindness to's Friend. / The more wce love the more we wish they'd Mend." BL MS Harl. 69 13 f.69'; Wilson 36-40. See also Swift's comments in Examiner 38 (26 April. 17 11). in Swift 3: 141.

himselfmcc, at last. br sov'ci" ( 5 ) . Buckingham. Monmouth. and Shaftesbury together constitute one of Dryden's intended audiences; another is the "Body Poliriqcre" ( 5 )and. in particular. "the

more Moderote sort" (3) to whom he directly appeals in his prefatory remarks. The ends of persuasion are. in each of these two cases. distinct. Shaftesbury and his îëllow victims are to

reform themselves; the "Body Poliriyrre," on the other hand. are asked to abandon the cause of the Whigs.

Satire that accentuates the tïrst audience. the satiric victim. rnakes prctençe to rel'orm. but

more tmly resembles what Edward Rosenhcim has uxfully called "punitive" satire. Such satire. as Rosenheim notes. is preaching to a public that is "cilren& thoroughly convinced" o f the victimfs culpability (13);" it achieves ils effect upon the victirn by giving public expression to such a belief. Satire that addresses itselF to a broader audience resembles. as Rosenheim suggests. "polemic rhetoric" in that it apparently seeks to persuade the reader to adopt somc particdar viewpoint. Satire that addresses this second audience is tiequently bald propaganda. and is the approach outlined in the remarks of Nathaniel Thompson. Tory publishcr and propagandist. in the preface to his A Choice Collecrion o f 180 L o y l Songs ( 1684. 1685):

AMongsr the several rneans rhut have been of h t r yerrrs ro rehce rhr cielrrdrd Mulrinrde ro their just Allegiance. this of BALLADS and LOYAL SONGS h m not been of the least influence. . . . The mis-infomed Rabble brgrr~lto listen; rhey began ro hear to[sic]Truth in u SONG. in rinw forrnd tlteir Errours. anci rrew charmil into Obedience. Those thot despise rhe Reverend Prelatc in the Pulpit. and the Grave h d g e on rhe Bench; thrir il-il1neither siibntir ru the Lnws of Cod or Man.will yrr /enci an irching Enr ro rz Loyal Song. i~iiy,cind often becomu ri

15

Rosenheim actuaily pays littlc attention to the rolc of the victirn. cmphasizinp instead the broader publicts enjoyment of the satire's aggressive ridicule. See also W. O. S. Sutherland. Jr.. The Art of the Satirist (Austin: U o f Texas P. 1965) 17- 18.

37

Convert by Ir, when al1 othvr mems prove ineffecru~l.'~ Appreciating that such miegories are not inviolable. Rosenheim posits a "satiric spectmm" that ranges between "persuasive" and "punitive" satire ( 16): much satire addresses both audiences, and employs punitive and persuasive elemenis as complements. using puhlic opinion to "punish" the victim. and the portrait of the victim to inlluencc opinion. Abscrlom cind Achilophells audience is double, for it addresses itself both to the vicious and to a gcneriil radership. Cleariy. however. its main persurrsivr thrus t is in the direction of the "Bo& ~ o l i t i q r u"". Ironically. however. the poem's greatest impact has bcen a reîlcction of punitive intent: whilc Abscilum mid Achiropheïs persuasive influence upon contemporary readers is doubtful and diftïcult to g a u g its

effect upon the reputations of Buckingham and Shaftesbury is unquestionable. Signiticantly. most seventcenth- and eighteenth-century critics who acknowledgcd the utility of satire as an instrument of reterm accentuatcd its punitive effects upon thc victim: its role

as propaganda is nrely explicitly conceded. although RenC Rapin. in his influentid Reflections on Aristotle's Twatite of Poet~y,opined that "It may . . . bc of great advantage in a Stare. when

taught to keep within its bounds."" More lypically. Obadiÿh Walkcr. wniing in 1673. çlaimed that satire "makes men stand bettcr upon their guard. when they know that thcy arc likely to hear

l6 A Choice Collection of 180 b y o l Songs. 3rd ed. (London. 1685) sigs. [a2'"]. Sec also William Meston, The Knight ([London]. 1723) sig. [ * 2 7

For Dryden's participation in the paper scuffle sparked by the Popish Plot. see Frank H. Ellis. "'Legends No Histories' Part the Second: The Ending oc Absdom undAcltirophr1." MP 85 (1988):405-06 and Phillip Harth. Pen for a Party (Princeton: Princeton UP. 1993). l7

l8

137.

Reflecrions on Aristorle 3 Tt-errtisc of Porsiu. trans. Thomas Rymer (London. 1674)

again of their actions; besides. it inureth thcrn to bear harsh words. and hndlr thcir passions."" As the Earl of Mulgrave exprcssed it in An Esmy upon P o e w ( 1682). satire can "mcnd the Age"

precisely because it cm "rnortify Mankind."20 Nor did the victim alone "benelït": portraits of vice dissuaded others by example. "Sutyr." John Phillips wrote in A Refzection on Our Modern Poesy (1695). "was a wholsome Remedy. / Prescrib'd to cure a People's

ala ad^."" while Rapin

believed that "The principal end of Sagr. is to instruct the Peoplc by discrediting Vice" ( 137). André Dacier. in his Essciy on Satire ( 1687. ~mslatedby Tom Brown in 1695), criticizcd those 3 -l

who tended to "Halt zit the out-side" of Horace's satiresr it was the t u k of the scholar. therefore. "to shew h e Rise. the Reason. and the Proof of his PI-ecepts"(sig. [A6']). The Earl of Mulgrave expressed a cornmonplace when he opincd that " S l i ~wcll r wnt has most successful prov'd. / And cures. because the remedy is lov'd" (9); nonethcless. the difficulty of proving the cffectiveness of satire was a usehl tool in the derogation of the hm. Charles Gildon (who seems to have held contndictory opinions about the genre) employs just such a

means to discredit satire in his Episde Dedicatory to Tom Brown's translation or Dacier's Essqv: The grratest Putrons of Satyr. 1 urn sirre. cnnnor prow hot ir rrnsiwr the End. the! prrtend, 'nrus cfesign'dfi)~:iiz. rhr Rcformation of Vice. rspecia& thor Satyr. which names Men. and rends to n persorici1 obirse. For insrerid of

Of Educrition. 1673, ed. R. C.Alston, English Linguistics 1500- 1800 229 (Menston: Scolar P. 1970) 244. l9

'O

An Essay upon Poenv (London. 1682)9.

" A Reflection on Our Modem Pues\::

An Essciy (London. 1695) 7. For a discussion of

medical images in satire. see Mary Claire Randolph. "The Medical Concept in English Renaissance Satiric Theory: Its Possible Relationships and Implications." SP 38 ( 194 1 ): 125-57.

"

Essay on Satire. trans. Tom Brown, in Charles Gildon. ed.. Miscellci~~y P u e m irpon Several Occasions (London. 1692) sigs. [BY-B67.

Refornting Vice it on& grorifes rhe ill-niirrci-rof r>tosr,and thrit Ct-i~ttinctl delight rhq hoivein hraring un othrr crbris'd, \iithocit an?; infliirncr on the Manners of those it aims to Comcr. (sig. [A47) That such accusations were to a great extent justified. even some satirists were inclined to admit:

In vain the fulsom errors of the Ages We stnve to mend in Satyr. or on Stage: Fools wiil be FooIs. Cullies will be undone. Tho we stiI1 Rail, & Nokes & Lee show on. Satyr may plead. of wholsome Councel hoast. Harden'd in Vice their Sence of Feeling's lost." The lament here is stntegic. a means of satirizing the impenitencc of thc guilty. as too is thai of

Sir Charles Sedley in "The Doctor and His Patients": "The Wise nm?;pwrich. rrnd Srrtyrists r d , 1 Cusrom u t d Ncirure will prui~oil."'" Some. like Richard Blackmore. in his E s s e s ripon Severn1 Subjects (17 16). more seriously challenged the instructive value of satire. Faking panicular aim

at the author of the Totler and Sprctotor. he wrote "that al1 his tine Raillery and Sütirc. tho admirable in k i r kind, nevcr rcclaim'd one vicious Man. or made one Fool dcpart from his F O ~ I ~Addison. ."~ replying to this attack. in The Free-holder 45 (May 25. 17 16). was çompelled to admit that Blackmore's "is a Position vcry hard io bc contradicted." although he assened hat.

at the least. the Horatian satire of thc Tcirler and Sprcrrrror "have made some Prosclytcs to the

"Satyr on both Whigs and Tories" ( 1682). BL MS Harl. 73 19 f. 120'; Wilson 12 1-30. Words in bold in this and future citations appear as such in the original. Cf. William Cowper's The Tusk, a Poern, in Six Books (London. 1785) 6 1-62: Bk. II [Il. 3 15-25].

'' The Puetical rind Dramutic Works uf Sir Charles Srdley, cd. Vivian de Sola Pinto, 2 vols. (London: Constable and Company. 1928) 1: 46; 11. 29-30; see also the spurious IIIrd part of Poents on Affuic~ofState (1698) sig. [A87 and Robert GouId's contradictoiy remarks in Love Given O're (London. 1682) sig. [A2']. and Presbyte- Rougir-Drcrrtn (London. 1683) sig. [A31. '5

Essaÿs upon Several Subjecrs (London. 17 16) xlviii.

40 Interests, if not to the Practice. of Wisdom and Vinue.""

Much of Addison's argument in The Frerhokdrr 45 m i s upon a specific delence of his own practice in the Tatler and Spectutor papers: he makes little real attempt to justify the genre itself. On one point. however. he is unequivocal: particular satirc is to bc avoided. Should a Writer single out panicular Persons. or point his Raillery ai any Order of Men, who by their Profession ought to be exempt from it; should hc slander the Innocent. or satyrke the Miserable. . . he might be sure of pleasing a grcat Part of his Readers. but must be a very il1 Man. i l by such a Proçceding he could plcase himself. (237) Addison's comments dcmonstratc the importance of the controversy ovcr the relative merits of particular and pneral satirc to the overall dekncc of satire. At issuc was the extcnt to which particular satire could be said to relorrn. and whether such an aim justitied an üttack upon an individual's reputation. Gildon argued in "To his Ingenious Fnend Mr. George Lsaacson. in defence of Persona1 Retlections" (1693)that particular satire is more etfeçtive than gencral satire. "For if Men must not be told their Faults." he explains. "they'l never mcnd 'cm; and geneml

Reflections will never do the Business. bccause the Devilish good Opinion ev'ry Man has of himself. fumishes him with an Evasion from the lash of general ~ h a r x t e r s . " ?Because ~ personal satire exposes its victim to "Puhlick Jesr." it also discouraged others from thc same vice (6).

In An Essny rrpon Publick Spiri! ( 17 1 1). John Dennis condcmncd "pariiçular Satyrs"

'6 73e Freeholdrr. ed. James Leheny (Oxford: Clarendon. 1979) 235. Iuvenalian satire was less defensible. Jeremy Collier wrote that this "Liccntious" author "leaches thosc Vices he wouid correct." Indeed. a too-vivid portrait of vice can. whatever the intent. conupi: "sornetimes to repon a Fault is to rcpeat it." A Short Vieir of the Iminorcilip and Profn~nenessof the Engiish Stage. 3rd ed. (London. 1698) 70-7 1.

because they sacriticed t r ~ t h . ' More ~ importantly. however. general satire was a more effective

instrument of reform:"' "the Pleasure which we tïnd that the Gcnerality of Mankind takes in particular Satyr. is a certain Sign that the Publick reaps littie Benefit liom it; for fcw are willing to apply those Faults to themselves. for which they sec any particular Person expos'd to Conternpt

and Infamy" (27). But while many expressed misgivings about the morality o l persona1 satire. most conceded that it was more effective. S w i f ~subvcrting the son of argument Iater used by Dennis. suggests in the preface to A Tale of a Tub ( 1704) that "Satyr k i n g lcvelled ai all. is never resented for an offence by any. since every individual Person makes bold to understand it of others. and very wisely removes his particular Part of the Bunhen upon the shouldcrs of the World. which is broad enough. and able ro bear it."" The debate about the mord validity and relative efficacy of particular satire highlights the paradox that confionted the satirist: while effcctivc mode ul' invcctivc (and the mure particular satire was defended as the most polemicn&,-

so because satinsts emphasized their wish to rcform the satiric victim). it wüs also thc l e s t morallv deknsible. a tact which actually reduced its cflèctivcncss: it was al1 too casy to dismiss

"

An Essu! upon Publick Spirit (London. 17 1 1) 27.

As McKeon hûs pointed out. "In neoclassical theory. generality is valued as a mcans o l ensuring that poetry will be m o d l y educative." Politics und Purrt:v in Rrsror-crrion E11glind (Cambridge M A : Harvard UP, 1975) 6. See also William H. Youngren. "Gencrali~yin Augusvan Satire." In Defense of Reading, eds. Reuben A. Brower and Richard Poirier (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1962) 206-34. "

'O Tale of a Tub. 1704, eds. A. C. Guthkelch and D. Nichol Smith. 2nd cd. (Oxford: Clarendon. 1958) 5 1. See ais0 Pope's comment h a t "Gencral Satire in Timcs 01' Gcneral Vicc has no force, & is no Punishment." The Correspondence of Ale.randet- Pope. ed. George Sherburn (Oxford: Clarendon. 1956) 3: 423. CL "Utile Dulce" (1681): "For who about this spacious Town c m hear 1 A Knave's. a Fop's. a Cuckold's Character. I But suait he thinks within his guilty rnind I One ( i l not al1 of these) for him design'd?" BL MS Harl. 73 19 f.65'; Wilson 49-55.

satire by clairning that. in the words of Addison. the satirist was simply a "very il! Man." Didactic effectiveness was the one criterion of excellence upon which ncarly al1 literary critics of the seventeenth-century agreed. The authonty of Horace in this mattcr. who insisted that poetry communicate both utile et dulce. was absolute. "A Poet should infonn us. or divert." he wrote in the Ars Poeticu (here quoted from Oldham's trmslation). "But joyning both he shews

his chiefest Art" (11.535-36). Rapin could assert without fear of contradiction that. whilc "delight

is the end Poctry aims at." it w u not "the principal end" (9)." It was. to a great cxtent. the instmctivc nature of epic that gave that genre. and epic experiments like Sir William Davenant's

Gonriibert ( 165 1) or Cowley's Dniideis ( (1656).their prestige:"

thcx last two works wcre much

admired and widely read in their own day because thcir attempts to reform the cpic so as to makc it more instructive to a modem audience were seen as JO viially important. Thar neither poem has fared well with twentieth-ccntury readers is (in part) an index of how low a priority we now assign to didacticisrn: as Alfred Harbagc drily noted in 1935. "Gonrlibrrris not so tiequently rcad

" This is, of course. a cornmonplacc:

îÔr other examples, sce Gildon's Miscrllr,nrocts Letteil and Essays sig. [ A 3 7 Collier 1. and Dennis' The Gruunils of Criricisut in Port/? (London. 1704) 9- 10. In old age. Waller. according to Samuel Johnson. expressed a desirc to "blot from his works any line that did not contain some motive to virtuc." Lirrs of r l t ~English Ports, ed. George Birkbeck Hill, 3 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon. 1905) 1: 283. -4'

- - See. for example. Rymer's "Pretàce to Rapin." The Criricul Wurks of'T/ionrir.sRyiwr. 1956, ed. Curt A. Zirnansky (Westpon. CT: Grcenwood P. 197 1) 7. and Samuel Wesley's An Epistle to n Friend Concerning Poetry (London, 1 7 0 ) 2 1.11. 789-93. Thcre w u , however.

opposition to their experiments; as Edward Pechter has notcd. Dryden (despitc his use of the Gondibert stanza). later "vigorously opposes Davenant and his program." Dtyclrti 'S CI~~ssicrtl Theory of Lirerature (Cambridge: Cambridge UP. 1975) 186; see also C'errait7 Verses Written by Severpll of the Authors Frirniis ( 1653). in Appendix II of Sir William Duwnont 3 "Gonciibrrt," ed. David F. Gladish (Oxford: Clarendon. 197 1) 272-86 and Boileau's The Art of Poetr?. trüns. Sir William Soames and Dryden (1683) in Volume 2 of the California Dryden 11. 12 1-30.

43

in these days."" Davenant's epic. tapping into a venerable tradition of nco-platonic çriticism.

employed ideai l o m s to communicate uuths that transcend the accidental forms of physical

reality: his ultirnate goal. as he expresses it in his intlucntiai "Preîàce" to his epic. is. like that articulated by Sir Philip Sidney. to deliver ÿ. "golden" world wherc nature's is but " h r a i ~ n . " ~ Davenant's style. thernes. and narrative arc the direct consequence of his attempt to producc a work that will operate "forthe honor and benef7rWof his nation (43).j5

Like satire. cpic had two potential audiences. the rnost important heing rhose in power (in the nomal scheme OC things. a king or prince) to whom the example provided hy his princely hero would prove most apposite. Davenant. however. stresses the uses of literaturc in cducating (or propagandizing) the genenl pop~iation:'~while "the Minde can never be consuain'd. . . . it may be gain'd by Persuasion" (38)." Epic achieved this "Persuasion" by way of a subtlc infusion of

virtuous ideas: Davenant suggests the use of "Images of Verrue so amiable that hcr heholders

71

--

Sir Willicrin Dmvnctnr (Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P. 1935) 180.

w A Defence of P o e t y . Miscellaneous Prose of

Sir Philip S i t l n q . eds. Katherine

Duncan-Jones and Jan Van Dorsten (Oxford: Clmndon, 1973) 78. For a discussion of seventeenth-century associations of genesality and instruction. sec William H. Youngren. "Generaiity. Science and Poetic Language in the Rcstoraiion." ELH 35 ( 1968): 158-87.

'' See Zwicker's discussion of Davenant's "poliiicized acsthe~ic"in Lines uf Awhorin 1723, and Lois Po tter. Secret Rites and Secret Writing (Cambridge: Cam bridge UP. 1989)93- 100. j6 The dedication of the poern's critical prehce to Hobbes is thus cntisely appmptiatc: it has even been suggested that Hobbes followed Davcnant's lead in his understanding of the importance of the moral and political cducation of the iuistocracy. See Mary Edmond. Rare Sir William Duvenant (Manchester: Manchester UP. 1986) 108.

Davenant's choice of heroic poctry is also prcdicated upon his faith in "thc particular strength of the Heroick; which hath a force that overmatches the infancy of such mindes as arc not enabled by degrces of Education" (38). "

should not be able to looke off (nther gentiy. and delightfully infusing. then inçulcating Precepcs)." Only "when the minde is conquer'd" by delightful images of vinue should thc stace bend its populace. now as pliant as "a willing Bride." to the gcntle mlc of law (39).Two vital elernents of the poet's art. working through the narrative. combined to impress upon thc reader the precepts of vir~ue:the fable provided vividly realized examples of the blcssings visited upon the virtuous (and. of course. the misenes endured by the vicious). while a judicious crnploymcnt

of hyperbole. idealization. and imaginative reconsuuction wrxked to transtorm cwn the rnost quotidian subjects into unambiguous represcntations of vice or vinue. One of the period's clearest süitements of the function of instruction through example appears in Rapin's influentid Reflecrions on Arisrotle's Treatise of Poesie. Working from the assumption that "al1 Poe-.

whcn 'tis perfect. ought ofnecessity to be a publick Lcsson of good

Manners For the instruction of the world." Rapin explains that "Heroick Porsir proposes the example of great Vinues. and great Vices. to excite men to abhor thesc. and [O hc in love with ihe other: it gives us an csteern tor Achilles in Humer. and contcmpt for irhersirrs: it bcgets in us a veneration for the piety of Eneus in Virgil. and horrour for the profaness of Mrzo~riris"( 13). Tragedy inculcates a love of vinue because "it lets men see lhat Vicc never escapes unpunish'd":

comedy ernphasizes to an even greatcr extent the negativc exarnplc. and hy this means "çorrccts the publick Vices. by letting us see how ridiculous thcy are in particulars" ( 13- 14). The central premise here is that the poet shows rather than tells the reader what is or is not virtuous. an approach rerniniscent of Hoi-ace's advice in the Ars Porticu: Some things are best to act. others to tell; Those by the car convcy'd. do not so wcll. Nor half so movingly affect the mind.

As what we are to our cyes prexnted find. 10Idham 11. 302-05) While Horace is largely concerned wilh aesthetic rcsponse, his advice, with its concem for affective psychology. is applicable to Davenant's theory of poetic instruction as wcil. as is most clear from a document published in 1653. and now known to have been the work ol' d avenant-" A Proposition for Ahoncement of Mowlirie, By cr nrw ii-rry of Entertciintnrnt of the People was probably part of a pragmatic campaign by Davenant to pave the way for the kind of quasi-operütic performances that he wished to stage. To this end he sough t to dcmonstrate drama's potential uses as propaganda: "if the peoples senses were charm'd and entertain'd with things Iàmiliar to thern. they would easily follow the voices of their shepherds; cspecially if there wcre set up some Entertainmen t. where lheir Eyes might be subdu'd with Hemiccill Pict~iwsand changes ol' Scerrcs" (244-45). Davenant's basic premise -- that representations of virtue (communicatcd. in this case.

through performance) succeed because they require of the audience little consçious engagement with the ideas put fonh by the text -- is predicated upon the common assumption ihat literature can catch the audience unawarcs. IL is an idea that Davcnant had already cxpresscd in his

Prrfucr: the poet succeeds by "rüthcr gently. and delightl'ully infùsing. thrn iiiculcating Prcccpts." Dulce becomes. in k t . a kind of blind that masks the operations of i d e . To a degrec, satire shared with other toms of literature this rirudus uper.clndi. Vice was to be made as unattractive as possible. and the vicious were to be shown sul'fering for thcir transgressions so as to instill a horror of both the sin and the sinner. Sir Carr Scroopc's I n

Defence of Suzyr (1676?)characterizes invective as thc most powerCu1 1001in thc pociis arscnal

''

See James R. Jacob and Timothy Raylor. "Open and Obedicnce: Thomas Hobbes and A Proposition for Adi*ancement of Moralitie by Sir William Davenant." SCent 6 ( 199 1): 205-50; the piece is dated 1654. Jacob and Raylor reprint the text. and it is iTom this that 1 quote.

because the negative examples that it provides are so vivid:

And (without doubt) though some it may offend. Nothing helps more than Sïtzyr, to amend III Manners, or is trulier Virtues Frirnd. Princes. may Laws ordain. Prirsts gravcly Preach. But Poers. most successtùlly will teach. For as a passing Bell. frights from his Mror. The greedy Sick man. that too rnuch wou'd Eat: So when a Vice, ridiculous is made, Our Neighbom sharne. keeps us from growing ad.'')

Unlike other f o m s of literature. satire can render its negative examples as "ridiculous": it does not merely present vice. but actuaLly redetines it. for our iaughter may force us to rcvix our judgment of the thing ridiculed.'1° The key to Scroope's acçount of satine ridicule. howver. is Hobbes' conception of laughter. "the apprehension of some deformed thing in another. hy cornparison whereof they suddenly applaud thcrnselves. And it is incident most

t»

them. that are

conscious of the kwest abilities in themselves; who arc torced to kecp thcmsdves in thcir own favour. by observing the imperfections of other men."" While this description retleçts in obvious ways upon thc charmer of the satirist." it aiso describes the persuasive efkct of satire upon the rcadcr: our laughter rcsults h m the

j9

Printed in Appendix II of Walker's edition of Rochester. 136: 11.5- 13.

'O The extent to which satires employ ridicule can vary widely: as Joseph Tmpp says of Juvenal. "tho' he may sornetirnes laugh. he is. for the Generality. serious: and shcws the Lash much more than his Teeth" (228). See however Guilhamei. Slzrir-e 7- 1 1.

Lei*iathan. 1651. ed. Richard Tuck. Cam bridge Texts in the History of Political Thoughi (Cambridge: Cam bridge UP. 1991) 43. Cf. Bakhtin's discussion of "carnival laughter" in Rabelais and His World. 1965. tram. Hélene Iswolsky (Bloominpton: Indiana UP. 1984) 1 I 12 and Allan Ingram. Intriecire Laughter (New York: St. Martin's P. 1981) esp. 9- 19 and 47-61.

'' See Phillip S. McKnight. "'Sudden Glory':

Some Prcliminary Notes on the Assailani. the Victirn and the Collaborator in Typc J' Satire." CollG 18 ( 1985): 194-95.

"apprehension" of defomity (Le. vice). but is prompted. ultimztely. by thc existence of deformities within ourselves. our perception of which inclines us to an ;1sserGon of our supcriority by ridicule. Satinc exempia. then. do n a gently insinuate their images of vice and virtue. but act directly upon Our conscious thought. forcing us to apply their lessons directly to ourselves. A s

Paul Fusseii has notcd of the genre. it inculcates "self-distrust": "the acute reader is moved to consider his own fallen sute as well as that of the ostensible target" (82-83). At the same tirne. the punitive agency of the satirist also discourages us frorn vice. lest we. like our unfortunatc "Neighbors,"be exposed to public shame. Scroope's knaves and villains

Hate Poers all. because they Poets fear. Take hecd (they cry) younder Mad D o g will bite. He cares not whom he fails on in his tït; Corne but in's way. and strait a nrw Lcrnipoone Shall spread your mangled Fame about the Tonm. (Rochester Il. 1 1-45)

Satire's direct application to the reader is underlined by the tendençy in the pcriod to characterize the genre as a kind of mirror. within which ive may glimpse thc rcîlcc~ionof our own grotesque vices. even where the ostensible victim is someonc else:" Send forth dear Julian. al1 thy Books Of Scandal. large & wide. That every Knave that in 'em Iooks May see himself descnb'd; Let ail the Ladies read their own. The Men their lailings sce . . .u

See 7he Muses Farewl (sig. [A27): "Among the Ancients. Satyr rt-lis in IZIUCIZ estwm, being us a Faithful Looking-Gluss of Humane Nature und Things. whrrein the Vices. Ignorance. and Follies of al1 sort of Persons werr fuiri? reprcirenred, which rirher Self--Law ivoirld nut su ffer them to see, or the Interest and Flatte? of othrrs rnight endeavour tu disguisc." The tradition of such works as A Mirror for Magistrutes was still very much dive. as the title of the Tory ballad satire, L q v a b Tkiumphanr: Or. A Laoking Giuss for Deceivrrs (London. 1682) indicates. "Directions to Secretary Julian" ( 1682). BL MS Harl. 73 19 C02'; Wilson 86-9 1.

This belief is the source of the central paradox. and humour. of that argument of Swift's in the Preface to The Battle of the Boob that " S a p -is cr sort of Glass. wherein Beholders do gmeruily

cliscover e v e y bo&'s Face but their Own" (2 15): it is only a perverse blindness that allows so many readers to overlook the reflection of their own face tigured therein. Where mimetic forms conventionally reflect the essential identity of their subjects. the satiric mirror effects reform. less

by its delineation of its putative victim. than by the way it forces the reader to confront his or her

own distorted visage-"

In this sense, satire is not truly mimetic. but mther corresponds more cloxly to what IM. H. Abrams has called the "pragmatic theory" of literature; this he defines. in terms that recall the polemical function of satire. as an approach that "looks at the work of art chiefly as il means to an

end. an instrument for getting something done?

Seventeenth-centurycritics frequently excluded

tis satire from the category of mimetic literiture. Francis Bacon. in his De A ~ i g ~ ~ t mScirntcrr~mt ( l623), calls poesy "an imitation of history at pleasure." and notes hat he will for this reason

dismiss "from the present discourse Satires. Elegies. Epigrams. Odcs. and the like; and refer them to philosophy and the arts of speech. Under the name of Poesy I treat only of feigned hi~tory."'~ Some seventy years later. Sir William Temple makes the same distinction in his essay "Of Poetry"

Patricia Meyer Spacks. in "Some Reflections on Satire." Genre 1 (1968): 13-30. argues that "true satire" operates by creating a sense of uneasiness within the audience; the limitations of this definition are evident in the fact that she is therefore forced to exclude Mac Flrcknoe. which "works entirely through the responce [sic]oC complacency" ( 2 8 ) . IS

46

The Mirmr and the Lump. 1953 (Oxford: Oxford UP. 197 1 ) 15.

" The Works of Francis Brrcon. eds. James Spedding. Roben Leslie Ellis. and Douglas Denon Heath, 14 vols. (Boston: Brown and Taggard; New York: Hurd and Houphton. 186074) 8: 439-40.

(1690): "When 1 speak of Poetry. 1 mean not an Ode or an Elegy. a Song. or a Sa~yr.nor by a Poet the Composer of any of these. but ofa just Poern."" Temple's exclusion of this collection of literary foms Ii-om his discussion is hased on his perception that they are not mimetic. Satire's proper subject is "Reproach" (309); i t im itates an emotional response rather than an object. and is therefore reaIly an expressive form. Temple and Bacon may. however. rnean something else as well by thcir distinction: satire dit'îèrs tiom " feigned history" because it eschews the use of fictions;"' indeed. dcclarations of absolute veracity

are a characteristic of the genre. "But sure we faign"? Juvenal asks in Satire 6. in Ihc midst of a catalogue of female vices: his answer impressivcly retleçrs his own horror at the evcnts diat he has witnessed, and is now describing: "Would we did Fable now" (Holyday 104). Juvenal's

employment of realistic detail. as well as his tendency to avoid narrative. reinforcc this impression of veracity: he seerns a chronicler or historian rather than a fabulisi. The English satirists of the mid to late seventeenth-century Iikewisc claimed that their satire provided unmcdiated access to the real world. Rochester's attack on Sir Carr Scroopc in "On the suppos'd Author of ii Law Poern in defence of Satyr" ( 1676'?)exemplifies rhis fiction of absoluiely h i t h h l reprcscntation:

To rack, and torture thy unmeaning Bruin. In S a ~ praise, n to a low uniun'd strain. In thee was most impertinent and vain. When in thy Person, we more clearly sec.

Miscellaneri. The Second Purt. 2nd ed. (London. 1690) 295. Ji)

Fictions were a primary chanctcristic of poetry; Sidney made it a comerstone of his defence of literature. while Ben Jonson callcd die poct "a Maker. or a Faincr: his An. an imitation or faining." a definition that Temple repeaü (Miscellrrnra 282). See Discowrirs; or; Tintber. Workr, 1L vols., eds. C.H. Herford. Percy and Evelyn Simpson (Oxford: Clarendon, 1925-52) 8: 135. See also Jean Le Clerc. Parrhusinnrr: Or, Thorights upon Sevrwi Subjecrs (London. 1700) 1-2.

That S m y r s of Divine Authority. For God. made one on Man. when hc made thee. (Il. 1 -6J5O

Here. the figure of the satirist disappears almost çompletely: God is the satirist." Dryden's The Meda11 (1682) is arguably his mosr topical and direct verse satire: while undeniably the most scumlous and hyperbolic of his satires. the h c t that it refrains liom the \

narrative fictions that chancterize both Mac Flecknoe and Absdom and Achitophel allows

Dryden to assume a posture of u tter probity. In the "Epistle to the Whigs" that prelaccs The

MedaIl, Dryden ironically accentuates his own vensimilitude. and hithfulncss to the commemorative medal struck to celebrate Shaftesbury's acquitta] by a London jury: "'Tis the representation of your own Heroe; 'tis the Picture drawn at length. whiçh you admire and piizc so much in little" (38). Despite the facetious tone here. Dryden is making a senous daim to veracity. While the medal appears to be a celebratory portrait of the Whig Icadcr. its actual mcaning. interpreted properly. is othenvise." Dryden poses as a painter of historical portraits. who has taken great pains to ensure that the likencss is exact:"

Similar is Rochester's "Tunbridge Wells. A Satyr." 11. 27-28: "Nature. h u donc the Bus'nesse of Lampoone. / And in théir lookes. thcir Characters has shownc"; sec also the attack upon James Douglas. Lord Arran in "An Hcroick Poem." BL MS Harl. 69 13 f. 100': Wilson 6875.

''

CL: Jeremy Collier's assertion that "THE Lincs of Vinuc and Vice are Struck out by Nature in very Legible Distinctions . .. and in the greater Instances the Spaçe bciwcen them is easily perceiv'd. Nothing can be more unlike than the Original Forms of thesc Qualities" ( 140). " Dryden suggests ironically that the medal is an exact Iikcness of Shdteshury: "So Iikc the Man; so golden to the sight. / So base within. so counterfeit and light" (11. 8-9). 53 The advantage of association with history painting -- that of appcaring to "show" (objective) rather h a n "tell" (subjective) the reader about vice -- is thc prirnary conceit of the "Aavice to a Painter" poems. See A. E. Wallace Maurer. "The Design of Dryden's The Meddl." PLL 2 (1966): 293-304. Dryden's comment that "1 am no great Artist; but Sign-post painting

Yet for your c o d o n the lincaments arc truc; and though he satc not five times to me. as hc did to B. yct 1 have consultcd History: as the Irczliun Painters doe. when they wou'd d n w a Nero or a Caligula; though they have not seen the Man. they can help their Imagination by a Statue of him. and tind out the Colouring t'rom Siietonius and Tucitus. (381% Dryden's cornparison of his own task with that of a history painter. and his allusion to "Snetonius and Tacirus." allow him to reconfirm his ÿffinity with the historian. In hct. Dryden's theme here is

another version of Davenant's neoplatonic ideal. reconfigured for the purposes of satire: the satinst paints not the outside. but rather the real. essential tmth as rcvealcd by a man's ac~ions.~' As Edward Bysshe conceded. the normal standards of 1iteru-y m t h did not apply to satire. which

"may be fine. and me Satire. tho' it be not directly and according to the Letter. true. 'Tis enough that it cany with it a probability or sem blance of Tr~th."~~ Bysshc's commcnts conccde more [han

will serve the turn to remcmber a Friend by; espccially when bcticr is not to be had" (35)is reminiscent of Marvell's question posed to the "painter of h t Iirstr~rcrions:"canst thou dawb a Sign-post, and that ill? / 'Twill suit Our great debauch and litde skill" (11. 7-8). Thc meanness of the subject requires littk more than a sign-post painter: as Michael Gcarin-Tosh notes. "seventeenth-cen tury paintcrs were as concerned with decorurn as thc pocts." "The Structure of Marvell's 'Last Instructions to a Painter."' EC 12 ( 1972): 50; see also James A. Winn. "When Beaiiv Fires the Bfood": Love and the Arts in the Age of D i ? h (Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P. 1992) 338-39. For a reading that accentuates the indeterrninacy of visual polemic. see K. M. Quinsey. "Sign-Post Painting: Poeuy and Polemic in Dryden's The Meddl." Rrsrorcition 16 (1992): 97- 109. Y Cf. Shadwell's parody of this passage in The Mecfui of Johu Bnyes (London. 1682) sig. [Alq; PUAS Yule 3: 75-95. and in Samuel Pordagc's Thlie Metlcil Reiws'd (London. 1682) 1-3; POAS Yale 3: 60-74. 5s

See Dryden's "Pmllel. o l Poetry and Painting" 1695): "In the characier of an Hcro, as

well as in an inferiour Figure. there is a better or worse likeness to bc iÿkcn; thc hcttcr is a Panegynck if it be not false. and thc worse is a Libel" (Dr Artr Gruphiccr 70). "Preface" io "A Collection of thc Most Na~ural.Agrecable. & Noble Thoughts," The Art of English Poetjy (London. 1702) sig. [*37. 56

most satinsts ~ o u l d . ~Nonetheless. ' " tho' it be not directiy and according to the Le tter." therc is another kind of tnith in satire that is. pandoxiçally. produced by the satirist's falsehoods and hyperbole. One index o l the period's faith in satire's supposed correspondence with the objective and venfiable "Fact" was the tendency of readers to identif'y actual persons with disguised portraits of malefactors: rnany original copies of satires contain conternporary marginalia exprcssly identifying such characters. This process of identification seduces readers. making thcrn cornplicit in the transformation of satiric distortions into "truth." as Addison. speriking of disguised fables (and citing Absulunt cind Achitophel as a particular instance) in Sprcrriror 5 12 (October 17. 17 12). astutely realized: "in Writings of this U n d . the Reüdcr cornes in Cor hall' of the Performance; Every thing appears to him lke a Disçovery of his own: hc is husicd al1 the while in applying Characters and Circumstances. and is in this respect hoth a Readcr and a Composer" (4: 3 18)? The verilcity of il siltiric portrait was "provcn'' whcn thc reüdcr recognized the original from the caricature: acquiesccncc to the satirist's tictions bccarnc ventkation of their truth. It is entircly characteristic of the genre bat its tnithlùlncss should bc established by sleight of hand. Satire. then. sought to establish for itselC a distinct rationale. prcdicatcd upon an accurate correspondence with the extemal world that was. nonetheless. "not dircctly and according to the

''

See however T. Adams' "To the Unknown Authour of the Following Pocm." published in 169 1 with The M e h l l : "Y' insinuate Loyalty with kind deceit. 1 And into sensc th' unthinking Many cheat" The Medall. The Works of Mt-.John D ~ y l r n(London. 169 1 ) sig. [a2'). 58

See William Kinsley's discussion of the rolc of the rcader in satirc, in "The Malicious

World' and the Meaning of Satire." Genre 3 ( 1970): 137-55. and Zwicker. Lines of Aurhoriv 3-6.

53 Letter, true"; it pursued moral reform by moraily questionable means of public exposure: it allowed the reader to laugh with the satinst whilc sirnulianeousIy threatcning the reader with thc same punishment. Satiric persuasion in the interests of modity secms laudable. but its eiticacy doubtful. What. then. was the reader to make of the satirist's motives? What if the punitive elernents of the genre wcre more than a means to an end4? In Quevedo's tïrst "Vision." a dcvil in possession of a tax-collecter provides the attendant priest and spectators with a description of Hell that is. in fÿct, a transparent satire upon human socicty: as the attending pliesi notes. "Thou art the Father of Lyes. and yer deliver'st truths. ablc 10 mollify and conven a Hcai-t of stonc."'"

The priest himself is convinced that "he that well weighs what h a bin said. may doubtlcss reap some benetit by the Discourse. Wherefore without considering whence it came: Remember. that Sad (althouph a wicked Prince) Prophesied; and that Honey has hem drawn out of Ihc Mouth o l

a Lyon" (26). Doubrless satire could benetït "he thai wcll weighs what has hcen said." but is it reaily possible to avoid "considering whencc it camc"'? Because the satirist's motives and methods remaincd. like the devil's. suspect, practitioncrs of thc gcnrc round thcrnselvcs thc lai-geiol' cri tics who would not. or could noi. acçept truths from the "Father of Lycs."

"A Kinde of Madness": Satire and Malignant Wit Midway through Horace's fouith satire of the lïrst book. an interesting cxçhangc dcvelops between the poet and an ndi?ersarius: "Thou sayest 1 love to jccr and study it. / To grdtitïe my own iil-nandd wit" (Brome 209). Horace's reply is a masterpiece of cvasion: "Whcrc didst thou pick up this Report? or who / Of my acquaintance e're reputes me so?" (209). Horacc

The Visions. trans. R[ogcr] L['Estrange] (London. 1667) 3-4-25.

distinguishes between self as person and self as wnter: hc does not. howcver. pursue this line hnher. embarking instead upon a new course. contrastirtg his mlc as a legitirnate sa~itistwith the secretive backbiters who betray their îiiends: If in rhy presencc any person does Report Prtiïlus Sacriligious. Thou (as thy custome is) wilt him defend.

..But yet thou canst not but admire how hr Eiirnsel lcould tiom h a t hdgvment so well frcc. (209-10) The false friends and poisonous wits that Horacc describes are hoth like and unlikc thc satirist: they share a method of auack. but Horace insisis that he himself at Icüst does so publicly and honestly: " this vice . . . thou shalt never find / In al1 my writings. no nor in my mind" ( 2 10). Horace justifies his satire on two grounds: on the one hand. the impression o l Horace's character gained from reading his satires is not representalivc of his acwal personality. while on

the other. he at lest is honest and lorthright in his criticisms. Neithcr rcsponse adequately addresses the accusation that his satires are motivated by malicc; marc signiliciintly. hoth rest on fundamen ta1ly conindictory assumptions. His initial rcsponse suggcsis the cm ployment of a poetic mask that shields the real Horace lrom too close an association wi th his own poetry. bui his second detènce rests upon a denial of any son of dissemhling: he is honesi prcçisely bccause hc

does not attempt to evade responsibility l'or what he has writtcn. The poct's cquivocations are al1 the more surprising given that Horace taiks in his satires so much about himscll'; yct. so laccd with ambiguity are Horace's satiric pocms that. as Raman Selden remarks. he "undermines with irony al1 pretensions and assertions of self, including those of the satiiist hirnselL ""

" Engiish Verse Satire L%O-l765 (London:

George Allen and Unwin. 1978) 2 1. Horace's protean nature is a function of his advocacy oî'a varicd stylc: in Satire 1. 10. he direcrs

Seventeenth-century critics tirquently viewcd Horace as a charneleon. Isaac Casaubon. in the "Prolegomena" to his edition of Persius ( 1605). notrd chat Horace îkequently speaks in different voices, and articulates contradictory philosophies: "Nor should it be doubted that such inconstancy as we see in his wntings is also found in his life. For he wrote as he livcd.""' Andre Dacier similarly commented that "as Horacr is a truc Pt-otrus. that takes a thousand different Foms." critics "have olien lost him. and not knowing whcre to tïnd him. have graplcd him as well

as they could" (Essqv on Sutire sip. [%6']). Horace's amhiguous poetic idenuty is a mask that the intelligent reader or critic must pcnetrdte to dixover the poei's truc meaning: "In thc manner that Horace presents himself to u s in his Satyrs. we discover nothing of him lit lirst. that deserves our Attachrnent." But. once we remove "chat. which hides him from our Eyes. and view him even to the Bottom. we find in hirn al1 the Gods together; that is to Say. al1 thosc Vertues. which ought to be the continual Practice of such as senously endeavour to forsÿke their Vices" big. [BS'J). Dacier rernains certain. where Casaubon was not, that there is an essential. unilied and ultimately apprchcndable personality behind Horace's varicd satiric voices. a pcrsonalily that açtually exemplifies his text and "al1 thosc Vertues." Paradoxically. Horace's subtly hidden pcrsonnlity

becomes the core of the satires' meaning. The language of Horace's text actually "hides him tiom our Eyes"; the reader need only peel away the words of the poem io discover. not mcrely the poet's meaning. but the dl-important figure ol'the poet himsclf.

the satitist to "play the Rhetorician." the poet. and the "Genrlrnmn"(Brome 232). Brome's translation accentuates the element of role-playing or disguise in this pusage. but the original Latin is scarcely less explicit: defendenre viceni niocfo rhetoris cm-ne puetce. i n w - h n i rrrbmi." the verb defendere having in a theairicd context the signitkation of play-acting. "

'

"Isaac Casaubon's Prokgomrnu to the Satires of Persius: An Introduction. Text. and Translation." trans. Peter E. Medinc, ELR. 6 ( 1976): 289.

Both Casaubon and Dacier rccognizc the ambiguity of Horace's portic identity. yet cach seeks, in different ways. to locate the meaning and mord signiticance OC the poetVssatire within the character of the satirist himselt As Ann Cline Kelly has noted. "Since classical Urnes. the idea

that a man's speech reveals his character has k e n axiorn~tic":~'"good" oratory was thus an index of a "good" man. Cicero. articulating a commonplace that dated back to Isocrates. claimed in Brutus that "no man can be an eloquent speaker. who has not a clear and ready conccp~ion."~~

This faith rernained a commonplace of the seventeenth-çentury. recciving its most iàmous articulation in Ben Jonson's Discowries: "hnguuge most shewes a man: speake ihat I may see thee. It springs out o l the most retired. and inmost parts of us. and is the Imagc of the Parent ol' it. the mind. No glas= renders a mans forme. or likenesse. so ime as his speech" (8: 625). In

1650. Sir Balthazar Gerbier. in A Pilblique Lrctrlre on Al1 the kngiroges. A m . Scirricrs cind Noble E.rercises. citing Jonson's remark. suggested that "Language. [wasJ to bc as the Soule of

the Soule. at least its interpreter":a in his Art of Well-Speoking. published that same year.

6L

Swiff and the English hnguuge (Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P. 1988) 120-

Cicero's Brutus, or Histoty of Funious Orarors: Also, His Ororor-.trans. E. Jones (London. 1776) 14: vi.23. See Milton's An Apolugy crguinst n Priinph(er ( 1642): "how he should be tmly eloquent who is not withall a good man. 1 see noi." Cotnplrrr Prose Works of John Milton. gen. ed. Don M. Wolfe. 8 vols. (New Haven: Yale UP. 1953-82) 1: 871. Somc ançient rhetoricians who did not concur were coopied to the cause: the translators OC rhi: 1686 edi~ionof Aristotle's Rhetoric contidently assert in "The Preface to the Reader" that "Oration or Spccch . . . is a kind of Image rrpwsenting the Minds of Men." a vicw that Aristotle nowhere cndorses. Aristotle S Rhetoric (London. 1686) sig. [ A T ] . See also Hobbes' abndged translation ol' Aristotle (1637). A Briefe of the Art of Rhctorique. in The Rhetoi-icsof Thutnus Hobbes cind Br~ncrtd Lamy,ed. John T. Harwood (Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southcrn Illinois UP. 1986) 108. 63

a A Publique Lecture on Ail the hngiragrs. Arts. Sciences mcl Noble Erercisrs (London. 1650)4. It is ironie to iind Gerbier articulating his h i t h in Iiinguage as an index of chancter: he himself was a consummate con man. Set: Hugh Ross Williamson. Forrr Srirar-t Portraits. (London: Evans Brothers. 1949) 26-60. and The Losr Will rirtrl Testurnerit of the Eurl

Gerbier opined that "the voyce . . . discovereth the disposition and composition of man. both in his Physicall humours. and in his Monll Not even the challenges to the conventional notion of language as an index of the mind which came From the new scientific empiricists ovcrtumed the older rhetorical conception.

Thomas Sprat thought the idiosyncracies of a personal style a danpcrous dislraction. and condemned "the easie vanity offinr speaking": "1 cannot with-hold my self. from betraying the shallowness of dl these secming Mysteries; upon whiçh. we Wrirers. and Sprcikus. look so bigg."66 The emphasis upon the employmcnt of rhetoric to inilatc reputations betrays Sprat's distrust: litenry identity as expressed through style is çheat. Yet rhetorical habits of thought remained ingri~ined;~'even language reformers like Bernard Lamy cvinçed some old-làshioned notions about the relationship between language and character? In Du L'Ar1 tlr Porlrr ( 1675).

translated as The Art of Sperrking in 1676. Lamy makes clear his fàith lhat "Disçoursc is die Image of the Mind;

WC

shcw our Humours and Inclinations in our Words beforc wc think of it. The

Minds then being different what wondcr if the Style of cvery Author has a characier that

of Pembroke, 1650 ([London. 16791) 4. a satirical pamphlet probably hy Sir John Berkcnhcad. 65

66

Art of W d - S p e a k i n g (London. 1650) 23.

The Histop of the Royal Socie- (London. 1667) 1 12.

67

See Brian Vickers and Nancy S. Suuever. Rhrron'c rrnd the Pursuir of Ttvth (Los Angeles: William Andrews Clark Mernorial Library, 1985) 4 1. and Youngren. "Gcncrality. Science and Poetic Language" 158-87. Rhetoric remaincd at the hcart of thc eduçational sysiem: see Foster Watson. The English Grrrnintcrr Schools (London: Frank Cass and Co.. Ltd.. 1968) esp 440-53. 68

Lamy was not a Port Royalist as the 1676 title page indicates. but he was a Canesian. and a "Modem" in the "QueseIle des Anciens et des Modernes." See Wil bur Samuel Howcll. Logic and Rhrtoric in Englcind, i.SOU-l7OO (New York: Russell and Russell. 196 1 ) 38 1-82.

distinguishes it from dl others. though ail use the same Terrns and Expressions in the same Lang~age."~'In fact. developments in the last decade of the century hrought linguistic thcory fullcircle: Locke's argument in An Essu? Concrming Hrcinun Un~lersrcinriing( 1690) that words referred to ideas linked language. once again. to the mind."

The period's faith in style as a kind of window to the sou1 of the wnter cncourqed cntics into speculations of a psychological or biographical nature. Not atypicai are Dryden's conjectures

upon the personÿiities of Virgil and Horace in his "Prcfiice" to the Fubfrs Ancienr ond Modem (1700): "In the Works of the two Authors we may read rheir Manncrs. and natural Inclinations.

which are wholly different Virgil was of a quiet sedate umper; Homer was violcnt. impetuous. and full of Fire."" This kind of analysis was applied to many authors wnting in a vanety of genres, but the attention focused upon the charmer of the poet by cntics of satire was boih more intense. and of a different kind. Dryden. for ail his interest in the crcative gencsis ol' the Ilicrd.

never questioned Homer1smotives for writing it. yet i t w u preçiscly ihis kind of inquiry Lhat

69

The Art of Speoking. in The Rhetorics of ntornas Hobbes und Betnorrl h m - 305.

See An Essa? Concrrning Hurnan Un&rstanding. 1690. ed. Peter H. Nidditch. cor. ed. (Oxford: Clarendon. 1985) esp. 4û2-04. As Murray Cohen has noted. "By the beginning of the eighteenth century. the idea of language study had shifted from thc iaxonomic representation of words and things to the establishment of the relationship betwecn speech and thought. . . . in the early eighteenth century. linguists assumed that language reflects the structure ol' thc mind." Sensible Wordr (Baltimore: John Hopkins UP. 1977) xxiv. As early as 1679. Samuel Shaw held that "err~vindividual man is a sysreme" of rhetonc; see his cccentric and hurnorous Wot-& Mode Visible. 1679. ed. R. C. Alston. English Linguistics 1500- 1800 3 17 (Menston: Scolar P. 1972) 'O

98.

Fables Ancient and Modern (London. 1700) sig. [*A2'1: Robert D. Hume suggests that this preoccupation is particularly characteristic of Dryden's later critiçism: Dtwlen 5 Criticism (Ithaca and London: Cornell UP. 1970) 17. See also Donald Judson ~ i l h u r n The . Age of Wit 1650-1750 (New York: Macmillan; London: Collier Macmillan. 1966) 97- 1 0 1. "

dominaied the period's critical response to satire. The issue of intention and. more imponantly. motivation. lies at the h e m of the satincal genre? Casaubon condemncd Horace precisely

because it was difticult to gauge the satirist's exact inuintions: on the other hmd. Persius' sincerity

was an important element of his excellence as a satirist: "You know indced when you rcad Persius. bat h e felt what he said. and rhat. as the Greeks Say. 'he wrotc çompletely from within and from his beliefs. not just from his lips"' (290).

The rnorality of the satinst was of particular interest to critics. In his A Dissrrrurion rrpon rhe Most Ceiebrated Ramun Ports (uanslated by Christophcr Hayes in 17 19: originally published in 1692 as Dissertario De Insignioribus Romunorum Porri.~)Addison chose. sipniticantly. ro begin his discussion of the relative merits of Horace and Juvenal with a discussion of' their moral characters: "HORACEb c m to this Day. an ill Character [or the Lovseness of his Conduct in Lik.

JWENALwas a rigid Practiser of ~ i n u c . " ~Juvenal ' can atüick "the grossesc Cnmcs" and employ "the highest Resentment of Soul. Ardency of Expression. and Sharpness of Speech" (48-19) precisely because the satirkt was himself so svictly virtuous." The more hlarneable Horace is

7L See Raymond Anselment's comrnents on the critique OC satire in William Falkncr's Conceming Reproach & Censirw ( 1684): "intent deterrnincs thc acceptable censure of persona1 shortcomings. When the cause is just and a p a t e r good is its end. reproof which denves no secret satisfaction. eschews distorthg language. and avoids personal prcjudicc or hai-rn is charitable." "l3enci.rt/est and Earnest": Marpreime. Milton. Mm-rll, SitYJt. rrnd rhr Decol-lrm of Religious Ridicule (Toronto: U of Toronto P. 1979) 24.

A Dissertution upm the Most Celebruted Ronran Poets. 1692. trans. C hris topher Hayes, Poems on Seiwal Occasions (London, 1 7 19) 47-38. See aIso Turiel-242. for 26 October. 17 10, The Tatler-.ed. DonaId F. Bond (Oxford: Clarendon. 1987) 3: 242-43. "

" Through much of Ihe seventeenth-century Juvcnal was viewed as a wild figure made nearly imtional hy the force of his own nge. but by the end of the century. hc was as iirqucntly characterized as a stem nghteous dcfendrr of rnorality. Some distinction must also he made between the character of his early works. and thal of his laier satires. which are more self-aware.

60

reduced. by vinuc of his own culpability. to jeering at "the ridiculous Foppenes of some particular Courtiers" (48). Signilïcanrly. most seventeenth- and early eighteenth-century definitions of satire take the character of the satirist as a starting point. Joshua Poole's 77ze English Prrrncrssrrs (1657) defines the genre by means of a catalogue of unpleasant traits that are as much a part of the character of the satirist as of the genre: Satyre. Girding. biting, snarling. scourging. jerking. lashing. smaning. sharp. tari. rough. invective. censonous. currish. snappish. captious. barking. hrawling. carping, fanged. sharp-tooth'd. quipping. jeering. flouting. sullen. rigid. impartid. whipping, thomy, pricking. stinging, sharp-fanged. injunous. reproachful. libellous. harsh. rough-hewne. odious. opprobrious. conturnclious. defaming. ~ a l u m n i o u s . ~ ~

Poole's colourful adjectives personify satire: a litcrary kind is imüginativcly transloimed into a snarling beast. Much the same process is at work in detïnitions that more explicitiy relate literary satire to the Greek satyr. "that mixt kind of Animal. . . . made u p hctwixt a Man and a Goat" as Dryden descnbed it ("Discourse." 28). The hlse etymology that derived the narnc oc the genrc from this fanciful woodland creaturc dominated considerations ol' the nature of litcrary satire

through most of the seventeenth-century? Despite the demolilion of this Iàllacy hy Casaubon in his 1605 study. De Snyrica G~-~cono>z P u a i & Ro~?iumnrntSmirci. and the attempts ol' Dacier and Dryden to populanze his denvation of the word from the Roman word srrturci or satira.

See William S. Anderson. Essoys or1 Roiwrn Sutir-e (Princeton: Princeton UP. 1982) 9 4 - 9 5 . "

nie English Parnassus (London, 1657) 176.

See O. J. Campbell, "The Elizabcthan Satyr-Satinst." Snrire. ed. Ronald Paulson (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 197 1) 80-87. and Keman. Cmtke~rdMuse 54-80. "

meaning "full" or "varied." critics continued to associate satire with the mythological çreature." Most seventeenth- and early eighteenth-century dictionanes and glossaries deîïned "satyr" and "satire" t ~ ~ e t h e r ; ~ q l iColes' s h a An English Dicrionri,l: ( 1676) is typical: "Smye.an hairy Monster. like a homed man with Goais têet; dso an invective poern."7') Edward Cocker's English Dictionay ( 1704) gives the entries for the words satyr and satire in such a way as to suggest that

the one naturally follows from the other: " S n ~ ra. feigned Monster with the hcc of a Man. Ears of an Ass. Leg. and Fect like a Goat . . . . Any thing written sharp or severe. is called a Satyr. and

so Sagricaipoems. arc such as have biting reîiections. or abusive wit in them."") The seventeenlh-century acceptançe OS the derivation of satire from saiyr prol'oundly influenced style. John Cleveland. in an oft-quoted passage frorn his "The RebeIl Scot" ( 1644). exemptities this satincal mode1 of ha1f-animal savagery: Corne keen la~nbicks,with your Badgers tèet.

77

The "Epistle" to John Biddle's Vit-gil'sBi~colicks.E~iglished. Whuc-runtois Adtlrd the TransluNon of the Aw First Suors of luïenal (London. 1634). calls his translations or the satirist a "Horne1-v(though holeso~ne)cfishof Surytic«ll srtiffe." and charclcterizcs Satire 1 as a mcal of "hardandsoiver-Ment" (sig. [CC]). an image that. as Kupersmith points out. may derivc h m his awareness of the derivation of "satire" from sutwu (56-57). Possibly. Henry Fielding's description of Tom Jones as a "Dish" of "prodigious Variety" dcrivcs frorn the same source. The Histoy of Tom Jones. eds. Martin C. Battestin and Fredson Bowers. 2 vols. ([Middletown. CT]: Weslcyan UP. 1975) 1: 32; see Edward A. and Lillian D.Bloom. "The Salitic Mode of Fecling: A Theory of intention." Criricism 1 1 (1969): 131-32. See also Meston. The Knight sig. [* 17. 78

Thomas Blountls Glossographia (London. 1656) is an interesting exception. and shows

that Casaubon's work was not entirely unknown: Blount's attempt to distinguish the derivation oE satyr ( h m sutyr-lis)from that of satire (from saryo) suggests that hc is aware o C satire's truc etymology (rv."Satyre"). See also Edward Phillips. n i e New Wodd of Engli.slt Words (London. 1658). which derives its etymology for "satire" and "satyr" from Blount. "

An English Dictionar-y. 1676 (Menston: Scolar P. 197 1) S. il. "Satyre."

80

English Dicrionury, (London, 1704) S. v. "Satyr" and " Satyriciil pwm. "

And Badgeer-like. bite till your tccth do meet. Help ye tan Satyrists. to imp rny rage. With al1 the Scorpions that should whip this age. (11.27-30) Forty years later. attitudes had changed littlc: the rationale oftèred by the anonymous "H. P." for

the roughness of his verse in A Sayr clgainst Common-Werilths ( 1684) draws an explicit connection between his chosen style. and the tigure of the mythological satyr:

I coiilri never iincrgine thut smoorhness shorrld br su obsulrirel~nrcessrrp in the clressing up of a Satyr; ir uli~.ayssreining ro me as clisngr~eribiero ser o Satyr Clouih'd in sufi and effeminnrr hnglirlgr. ris ru ser n Wor?miiscold cind w n t her sr lf in Billings-p i e Rheto ricl: in ci genrlr und ridwintugroirs Gcit-b.

''

"Satire" becomes. litenlly. a "Satyr." an image of the genre pcrsonitied [hat undcrlincs thc cxient

to which satire was identified with a charxieristic kind of prsonality; as Marvell noted in the

second part of The Rrheursul Trcinsprosil. "whereas those that treat of innocent and henign argument are reprcsented by the Muses. thcy that make it their business to set out othcrs illSavouredly do pass for Sri~res.and themsclvcs are sure to be pcrsonaied with prick-ears. wrinkled homs, and cloven feet."" Even Dryden. who was to hccome so important in rcdetïning

the genre. reveals in his "To the Memory of Mr. Oldham" ( 1684) an adherence to thcse associations: while chiding Oldham for disregardhg "the numbers of thy native Tonguc." Dryden

A Sapr agcrinst Coit~inonWrulrhs (London. 1684) sigs. [B 1"'1; cf. Richard Flecknoe. "Of Railletie."in Eniginoricoll Charucrers (London. 1658) 30 and George Wither's "The Scovrgc. Satyr. 5." in Abuses Srript und Whipt (London. 16 13) 262. See also Bernard Harris. "Men like Satyrs." Eiizabethan Poetr-y. eds. John Russell Brown and Bernard Harris. Stratford-upon-Avon Studies 3 (London: Edward Arnold, 1961)) 19 1.

'' The Rehearsal Tt-anspi.osYand The Rehrrrixtl Trunspr-os'cl. The Semiid Pur-t.ed. D. 1, B. Smith (Oxford: Clarendon, 197 1) 16 1.

concedes that "Satyr needs not thosc" (II. 14-1s)."

Harold Love. describing the larnpoon tradition in English satirc. notes that such pocms were "conceived of as a senes of virtually independent satiric e p i g m r n ~ " ;indced. ~ John Peler has

usefully suggested the influence of Martial's epigrarnmatic form on the development of English satire." The efkct created by this kind oT loose structure is veiy like that of strearn-ofconsciousness: we are treated to a barrage of apparently disconnected ideas. irnagcs. and characterizations. al1 presumably produced by associations within the mind o l the author. that communicate a sense of the writer's state of cxcited and uncontrollable outrage." The anonymous court lampoon "Satyr on both Whigs and Tories" (1683:') is a representarive example: Name we the Whigs. we must the num'rous Troop. Like Faggots, four for Sixpence, bind 'em up, Fools by the Dozen. Rascals hy the Gross. Knaves. Fops. & pardon'd Rcbels, which are worsc. Show me the Man. & lay the Traytor by. We cannot charge with Knave or Foppcry.

" Anna Battigclli has suggested that Dryden vicwed Oldham's üchicvcmeni as an intemediate stage in ihc "progress" of satiric form: xe "Nature. Timc. and Trmslütion: Dryden's 'To the Memory of Mr. Oldham' and the Poctic Tradition." Restorutiu~~ 14 ( 1990): 38. "Rochester and the Traditions of Satire." Resrorurion Litermrtre (London: Methuen. 1972) 147. A. Alvarcz has suggested that Cleveland was, fundamcntally. "a wnter of epigrzms." n t e School of Donne (London: Chatto and Windus. 1961) 125.

" Cornpiaint and Satire in Earh English Litet-utiwe (Oxford:

Clarcndon. 1956) 160-67. See an epigram written by John Owen, and translrited by Thomas Pcckc in Prrrnussi Pwrperiuriz (London. 1659): "AN Epigrarn may aptly stiled be. I The long-ledg'd Satyn. bief Epitomie. / A Satyr bears equal Respect; and is / An Epigrim, with a Peiiphrasis" (72).

" See Kernan, Cnnkewd Muse 35:

satire's "rapid transitions retleçt the chancter of the satinst and suggest his sense of ugency. his zeal." Alvarez suggests that Cleveland's mcthod involves 'Joininp up as many ideas and images as possible. heterogenous or not. by thcir accidents of sound and sight." This is he suggests. "more a gamc of word-association [han a foimal method" (128); Alvarez. however. is mistaking the eSfcct of Cleveland's poctry with its cause.

Kent siavers. Wital Stamford is a Tool, Armstrong a Rogue. Monmouth bot11 Knave & Fool. Lovelace a Sot. Brandon a gaping Traytor. And lately marry'd quondam Footman's Daughter. Who by the King inrich'd from scasce a Groat. Gives it to him who'd gladly cut his Throat: To Exercise wfh Talent he begins With murd'nng Boys. to end w ! ~murd'ring Kings." niere is no particular order to this succession of images and characterizations: it is ris though the poem's structure is dictated by the whimsical associations of these figures within the satirist's mind. Our perception of the satirist's (or satyr's) emotionai state becornes. therebrc. the argument o l the poem. The satirist becomes a "satyr." in both xnses oT ihe word: herein lies one

of the more important aspects of the Palse satire-satyr ctymology. for the derivation tends io shift attention away from l'orna1 elements. and instead associates the detlning katures ou thc genre with the supposed nature o l its creator.

The Romans did not associate their scitim with the rnythical Greck satyr. nor did they sce any connection between Greek satyr plays and a genre that. in the wcli-known words of Quintilian. was rorci msrr-a." But while the Romans did not associate the stitinst with satyrs. the poetic identities of Horace. luvenal, and Pcrsius are nonethcless closcly bound io thcir chosen

BL MS Harl. 73 19 f. 120'; Wilson 12 1-30. For Charles Gerard. Lord Brandon. a dissolute young spark who s~nick,and killcd. a footboy in 1676, scc Hatton 1: 127.

" Sce M. Fai?iusQuincrilimtrrs His Instinrrrs of Eloqirencr. trans. William Guthrie. 2 vols. (London. 1756) 2: 354; X.1.93. G . L. Hendrickson argues that Quintilian's phrase distinguishes that form pioneered by Lucilius ti-orn earlier invective forms:. sec "Satura Toia Nostra Est,"CP 22 (1927): 58. See also C . A. Van Rooy. Srudies in Clossical Sarir.r crnd Relcirrd Litero1-v The017 (Leiden: E. J. Brill. 1965) 1 17-23. and Michael Coffey. Romin Scitiw (London: ~ e t h u é n ;New York: Barnes and Noble. 1976) 3- 10. For a challenge to Hcndr-ickson. see Gay Sibley. "Sutura from Quintilian to Joe Bob Biiggs: A New Look at an Old Word." in Connery and Cornbe. eds.. Theorking Sutire 57-72.

f o m of literary expression. Urged hy his friend Trebatius to try his hand a&some safer genre.

Horace intimates that p n r e is detennined by the personality of the writer: "Father. that being it 1 I'de fain be at. my will exceeds my wit. / Not every Pen can paint in homd Field / Thick Groves oT

Pikes" (Brome 238; page misnumbered 239). Chided. like Horace. by a tnend. Pcrsius similarly maintains that he writes satire because he must: "I'me of a Scot'ting splcen. I Lovc to Flout / At Hypocrites: therefore it now must out" (Ho1yday 293-94). Signi ficanlly. there is the suggestion that he docs delight in "giving pain:"" Most imponandy. however. il is in Persius' nature to attack. Even the normally mild Horace employs this rationale:

That eveiy one doth awe Them whom he fears. with that whcre his strength is. And that by Natures Law appear in this: Woives smite with teeth, Buls with the hom (this must Be taught them from wiihin.) (239)m Panicularly signitïçant is the theme of compulsion that these passages suggest. The provocaton of extemal events uiggers in the satirist an irresistihle urge to respond.'" Pcrsius' satire "now must out." while Horace is not more culpablc îbr his satin. hiin thc WOLS or hear who employ their natural armaments. The elcmcnt o l human will is absent h m thesc accounts: whcn

89

Cachiimo in the original. with its suggestion o l loud or hoistcrous laughtcr.

cornmunicates sornething of the delight in trouble-making suggested by the irmslation: sec Elisha Coles. A Dicrionay, English-Lnrin. und Lntin-English. 2nd ed. (London. 1679) S. 1: "Cachinno." and R. G.M. Nisbet, "Persius." Criricd Essciys on Roinrin Litet-(mire: S~rrire.cd. J. P. Sullivan (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 1963) 43.

"

Cf. Whig and Toq, Or the Soibliilg Dlrellists (London. 168 1). in which satirists are described as "domestick Curs" who clash with "hw?ireupons tiil they griite" ( 1 ).

' A related issue is that of the cathartic effect of satire upon the satirist: satire is a purgative which relieves the satinst of pent-up "bile." See Randolph. "Medical Conccpt" 125-57. and Arnold Stein's discussion of mclancholy in "Donne and the Satiriç Spirit." EU-I I 1 ( 1944): 266-82.

Trebatius suggests that Horace simply cease to write, the poet acknowledps the wisdom oT thc advice, but confesses that he is unable to follow it: "Let me ncver stir. / If 'twere not better. But I cannot sleep" (238). He "must wnte Verses: that's my play" (239). Compulsion is similarly an important component of seventeendi-century satire: as Cleveland cxpressed his rage in "The

Rebell Scot," "1 am al1 on fire. / Not al1 the buckels in a Countrcy Quirc / Shall quench my rage" (11. 5-7). Less colourful. but equaily characteristic is Dryden's apology. in "To Sir Godîi-ey Kneller" ( 1694) for an anti-ferninist aside: "Satire will have roorn. wherc e'rc 1 w~ite"(11.94).'"

The lot-us clussicrrs for the idea is the opening passage ool'uvcniil's tirst satire:

Shall 1 be still an Auditor? And ne're Repay, that have so ofien mine eare Vext with home Codrus Theseciils? Shall one sweat Whiles his gown'd Comique Scene he does repcat? Another. whiles his Elegies soft strain He reads? and shall not 1 vex hem again? Shall mighty Telephrrs bc unrequited. That spends a Day in being AI1 recited? Or Volume-swolne Orestes, that does 1111 The Ma@ of an ample Book. yet still (As if the Book werz mad too) is extendcd Upon the very back. nor yet is ended? (Holyday 1) Echoes of these lines appear in Restomtion verse satire with a frequency diat attests to their intluencc. The most outstanding OC thcse is undoubtedly thc opcning passage 01' thc "Prologue" to John Oldham's S m y s rrpon rhe Jesuifs ( 168 1): For who can longer hold? when every Press. The Bar and Pulpit too has broke the peace? When every scribling Fool at the d a m s Has drawn his Pen. and rises up in Arms'? And not a du11 Pretender of the Town. --

'9

See also Dryden's Eleonot-a: A Pnnegyriccil Poem ( 1692) 11. 359-70.

But vents his gall in pamphlet up and down. (11. 1-6)'13

The most important facet of Juvenal's passage is that it converts subjective tonc and perspective into a strength. We arc enticed into acquicscence less by the justice oT the satire's arguments than by our respect for the sütirist's impressivc display of righteous indignation. The strength of the satincal assault that foIlows is derived kom the satiristfspowcrful idcntity. The most gnphic and powcrful expression of this idea occurs a litde later in Juvenal's tirst satirc: "Si

Nature wonr cornrnand 1 Verse. Indignation shnll ar leclsr indite / Srrch linrs, cts / or. Cluiirnus wrire" (3). Juvenal's addition to the theme of compulsion is the agency of inrligr~citiu.a concept that relocates the source of the satiric impulse outside of art. and within the involuntary passions

of the poet? We are rcminded of Plato's image of the çrcative process as a kind of irnpcrsonal divine frenzy -- keeping in mind. of course. Lhat this pwtry is derived no1 from the gods but From within. powered by indignation and malice." Sevcnteenth-century critics adaptcd Juvcnalinn indignorio to current psychological and physiologicai theory: Obadiah Walker's Of Edriccrrion speculated lhat various passions pri~duce distinctive species of wit. Spcaking of anger. he cites Juvenal:

Si natrira negat, filcir indignntio. i*rrsu~n.Arcliiluchrrs and Hippo17cr.r two very

93

See also H. P.'s A Snpr cigainsr Conunon-Weulrhs I and Samuel Wcsley's parody of satiric indignation in "On a Discourteous Damsel ihat Call'd Lhc Right Worshiptul Author -- (an't Please Ye!) Sawcy Puppy." in Maggors (London. 1685) 98-99.

" See Charles Widte. Lutin S h - e (Leiden:

E. J. Brill. 1970) 1 19.

Wither employs his Juvenalian motif. but introduces a more cxplicitly Platonic element: see Abuses Stript and Whipr 9. and Campo-Musce (London. 1643) 1. Scc also ihc title of one his latter works, Furor-Porticus (Le.) Prophrricw. A Porric Pkrrnsir (London. 1659). 95

bad Poea. yet for spire and rcrbbici. to bc revcnged of two pcrsons that injured them. invented those doggrei sorts of Verses. Iambicks and Scazons. whose force they so well appiied. that their Adversaries made away themselvcs. ( 124-25) Archilochus and Hipponax were traditionally citcd to exemplitjr the power of satirc to intlict harm.16 W&er here makes more explicit an idea only hinted at in Juvenal: versc produced

through indignation is more powerfùl than the products of wit nunured in less heat. Sirnilar in its implications an: Samuel Butler's remarks in his manuscript notes on "Wit and Folly": "Therc is nothing that provokes and sharpens wit llke Malice. and Angcr si Naturd negat hcii Indignatio &C And hence perhaps came the t k t occasion of cailing those Raptures Poeticall Fury. For Malice is a kinde of Madnes." Malice has power "above al1 other Passions. to hightcn Wit and Fancy":

"And therefore Satyrs that are only provok'd with the Madnes and Folly of the world. arc found to conteine more wit, and Ingenuity then d l othcr wrilings whaisoevcr."" Sntirc's powcrhl potentid derives from its intimate relationship wirh the mind and sou1 of the satirist:" as it is expressed in the anonymous "An Answcr to the Satyr on the Court Ladies" ( 1680). "those the

Bays shall b a r / Not that write bcst. but most maliçious arc."'F'

Archilochus was associatcd with a rclated genre. "Iarnhics": Michacl Cofky notcs that Horace and Quintilian viewed Iambics as a genre entirely distinct Iiom satire (7-8): sec also Ulrich Knoche. Rontnn Satire. ~ m sE.. S. Ramage (Bloomington and London: lndiana UP. 1975) 74-75. V6

'' Prosr Obsrn~utions,ed. A. H. de Quehcn (Oxford: Clarendon. 1979) 59-60. " See however, Butler's description of "A Satyr" as "a kinde of Knigh~Errant":

"ihough his meaning be very honest. yet some helieve he is no wiscr then thosc wandring Hcros used to be" (2 15). See aiso Earl Miner. "The Restoration: Age of Faith. Age of Satire." Porrt? crnd Dramu 1570-1700.eds. Antony Coleman and Antony Hammond (London and New York: Methuen, 198 1) 92.

B L MS Harl. 73 19 f.48'; Wilson 4 1-46.

Juvenalian indignutio and quasi-psychological rheones that closcly aîsociated satire with

the passions of the satirkt were. however. double-edged swords. for they led to charges of subjectivi~yand malice b a t undercut the credibility of ihe fom. The nccessity of maintaining the appearance of cornpliance with standards of Christian mordity further complicated mattcrs. Whiie some claimed that rhere were in the satires of Juvenal elernents compatible with Christian

rnorality.lm many mordists associated satire with likrtinism. free-thinking. and blasphcmous attacks upon religion.lO' Clerncnt Ellis' The Vani- of Scoflng ( 1674) associa& al1 forms of ridicule with atheism and "that malignant and heaving humour of pr-ide and self-cortceir."'" More moderate is the author of Poems on Seiveru1 Occusions ( 1681): satire c m make viçc appear "what really She is. ugly and ridiculous." but "so impious is the Age. and so deprav'd arc the Wits thereof. that die most happy Book of iMoruls in the World is hecome the Subjrçc of Sun-/-. Burlesque. Jocularig. and C~nteinpt."'~'

100

See Holyday. sig. (id']. Peter 109. and F r i k Stack's comrnenls on "'Christimizcd' Horace." in Pope und Horace: Studirs in Inrircition (Cambridge: Cambridge LP. 1985) 10- 1 1. 'O1 Collier opined that "That which might pass for Raillrry. and Entertainment in Heathenism. is detestable in Christianity" ( 14). while Jcan de La Bniyere opined thac "A M m boni a Christian and a Frunchrnan. is contin'd in Satire" (32). Sec also Milburn 275-83. A notable exception was Gilbert Burnet. who cornmended "Horuce. J~nwzul.and Persius" as a means of inculcating into those entenng orders a " Detestation of Vice. and a Contempt at' the comrnon Methods of mankind." Discourse of the Pusrorcil Cure (London. 1693) 162. Sec also -Manyell's self-justitication in 7'he Rrheorsal Transpros ' d The Second Port 163-69. and Dryden's deléncc of Chaucer's anti-clerical satire in Fables sig. [*C 17.

Io'

The Vanirv of Scof/ing (London. 1674) 5. For a similar view. see John Sergemt's

Raille? Defeared b?kalm Reason (London. 1699) 2. W. C.. Poerns on Serrera1 Occusions (London. 1684) sig. [AJ"]. Sec also Richard Allestree's 7he Goirrnment of the Tongur (Oxford. 1674) 10- 1 1.39-6 1. and 1 13-33. and Joseph Glanvill's sermon "The Sin and Danger of Scoffing at Religion." Seusunublr Reflections und Discourses (London, 1676) 6 ; cited in Anselment 19. 'O3

Satirists frequently had to accommodate such attitudes:"

John CaryIl. in N f ~ b o t h S

Vinyard, an allegorical satire protesting the persmution of Catholics in the wakc of the Popish

Plot. reigns in his indignation when it secrns to uansgress againsr Christian charity: Hold. Muse! Thy Zeal now grows to Muriny: Thou dost ignobly from thy Colours tly: Under the Srundard. of the Cross we serve. And from our Leaders ways we must not swerve.'" More radical in its interpretation of Christian strictures against ridicule is Elizabeth Tipper's poem "A Satyr." published in 1698 in her The PilgrNu's Viciricunt. Thc poem begins with a conventional

çharacterization oT "Saryr's Lash dipt. poison'd in Disgrme" as " f i t t» Scourge the Vice of Human Race;'" suddenly. Tipper remembers God's "Golden Rule": "First cost ri\r.ci! the Bucini

that hides rhc Lighr / Of thine own Eye. deluded Hypocrite" (7 1 ). Satirists should pray to God to "Makr mu m i e Christian. t h ' no Satyrist" (72). John Tillotsan. Archbishop of Canterbury. expressed his disapproval of satirc in a wrmon entitled "The Folly of Scollinp at Religion": "Satyr and invective are hr: easiest kind or wit. Almost my degree of it will serve to abuse and find fault For wit is a k e n instrumcnr. and every

IM

See James S. Baumlin's comments in "Donne's Christian Diatribes: Persius and the Rhetorical Persona of 'Satyre III' and 'Satyre V."' The Eugle ctnd the Doie. rds. Claude J. Summers and T e d = L a q Pebworth. Essays in Seventeenth-Century Licerature 1 (Columbia: U of Missouri P. 1986) 92- 105 and "Donne's 'Satyre IV': The Failure of Language and Genre." TSLL 30 (1988): 363-87. ' O 5 Naborh's V i n y r d (London. 1679) 10. Caryll's moderation wen t unapprtxiated by some: Lutudi(?) calls this "A scandalous libell reflecting upon ye Judges. & ye Kings witnesses as to ye plott." A Continuation of the Conlpleur CaruIogue, in Nrircissus Luttt-eil's Popish Plot Catalogues. ed. F . C. Francis. Luttrell Society Reprints 15 (Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1956) 4.

one cm cut and gash with

it."lo7

Tillotson's account or the genesis of satire is a new and

subversive variant of Juvenal's claim that satire requires merely indignation. rather than art: "A little wit, and a great deal of ill nature will furnish a man for Satyr" (4 l)."''

This too was the

opinion of Sir William Temple. expressed in "Of Poety": "Tis a very poor. tho' common Pretence to merit. to make it appear hy the Faults of other Men" (330). Such subtle reworking of Juvenalian indignatio made it easy for critics of the genre to identify malice and jealousy. rather than righteous indignation. as the origin or the satiric impulse. Walter Charleton's A Brief

Disco~irseConcerning the Different Wits of Men (1669) includes a portrait of "Malignant" wits. "Sazyrists and Cornicnl Poets." who "like Beetles. seem hatch'd in dung. or Vermine bred out of Ulcers; perpetually feeding upon the liailties and imperfections of Human nature."'"' This imagc of spontaneous generation functions as a brillian~if unconscious. parody of Juvcnal's indigncrtio facit motif. Similarly. Raillerir a k i Mode Consider'd describes the satirist as a crearurc akin to

the fabled spider. spinning invective out o l himself "out of pure spightt' (52-53).' I 0 For Charleton. on the other hand. satire's origins in envy means hat. logically. scoffcrs are inferior to those that they attack. "it being an Aphorism ol' daily Expcricncc: that rhc tt~ore imperfect men are in rhemtel~~es, !he more prone they nt-r ru C~Y~CIIIJ~ and scuflcrt othrts" ( 13 1 ).

lo'

Works . . . Containing Fifii Four Serntons rind Discoirrsrs (London. 1696) J I.

See also Isaac Barrow. Several Sermons rigninst Evil-Spectking (London. 1678) 73. and Anselment, Betwixt Jest and Earnest rsp. 8-32. 'O'

lrn A Brief Discourse Coltcerning the Diflerent Wits of Me11 (London. 1 669) 1 19. See also Flecknoe's "Charxter. Of a bold abusive wit." Enigmctticrill Chor.crctrr-s96-97. and Joseph Browne, The British Court: A Pornt (London, 1707) 3. 110

Cf. the characterization of Mercwius Britunicus in Mercuriirs Anri-BI-itmnic~is[2] ( I 1

August. 1645) 12: "like Spiders. he spinnes foure leaves of Rancor Urom his own Bowells."

Indeed. detractors see in others vices that are. in fact their own: "Thus drdwing suspicions Iiom the crooked rule of their own insincere Mind and depraved inclinations; they labour to perswade thernselves and others. that there is among Men no such thing as uue Virtuc. but only a Shadow or artificial representation of il" (13l)."'

As John Spencer wamed his friend Oldham. "no one

can in emest rayle at ills. / Unlesse within himself their stings he feels." "In kenning vice." he continues. "those most Quicksighted are, / Who in their hrests its counierpart do wear."Il2 When not castigated as rogues. satirists were chanctenzed as clowns: Obadiah Walker. in Of Education. describes "Drolls" as "those who spare neither their Souls nor reputation. to prove themselves Buffoons; and shew their abilities in ingenious Iolly" (745).Such men "become themselves really. what others are in their imagination" (246)."'

The persistent identification of the vehemence of satire with the pcrsonality of the satinst meant that. more frequently than not. the satinst's motives were impugncd and his or her satire dismissed as hopelessly subjective: "Who knows the Vice to Envy does belong. / Wou'd loathc the Sianders of a Railing Tongue." as John Tutçhin observed."" Horaçc. we have scen. answcrcd

"' See Dryden's Epilogue to The (Inhrippy Fuimirite ( 1682)11. 26-27. and Richard Blackmore. A Su->- against Wit.2nd cd. (London. 1700) 14.

"'Bodley MS R 198-204. reprinted in Oldham 540. '"

Lucian is described by Rapin as "a pleasant B~ifloon"( 139).while Fenand Spcnce commenied in his 1684 translation that "should 1 have drawn Liiciun to the Life. al1 bcspoitcd with his Pcederastic Humour. and tainted with the other Vices and Misfortunes of his Age. 1 must g m t he would then have proved the greatest Suryr upon Hintselfand instead of being an Insnumenr towards the prornoting of Virtue. his very Prerences to't. would have turn'd to its Scandul." Lucian's Works. 5 vols. (London. 1684-85) 1: sig. [ A 4 7 See Cnig 144-47.

"'A Congratularot? Puent ro the Rciw-enrl DI:John Tillocvon (London. 169 1) 5 . Tutchin is responding to the fluny of Jacobite and Tory satincal attacks that grectcd Tillotson's nomination to a see made vacant by the deprivation of the nonjurors: see for example "The

73

accusations of personal malice by a policy of indirection and subterfuge. while Juvenal poses as the righteous defender of virtue provoked beyond endurance by the spectacle of pervüsive evil: the creation of effective satire was. in the age of the Cicsars no less than in that of Charles II. one that required a not unsubsmtial degree of proticiency in the arts of evasion and subterfuge.

"This Evasive Way of Abuse": Criticism and Evasion The detractor. iiccording to the anonymous Roilierie

(1

lr Mode Consideril. is "a kind of

Camefion.that lives upon the worst sort of Air." a "Pt-orrusin Conversation upon cvery turn"

(5 1. 56). So effective are the detraccor's efforts to escape detection. and hence liability. that it is frequently impossible to locale the source of the slander: "He sometimes whispers like one that

discourses through the Speriking-Trumpet you shall hear the sound. but not know whu utters it. nor whence it proceeds" (55). Such evasions are. howcver. less a retlcction of thc naturally duplicitous character of detraction. than of the rhetorical strain that expressive approachrs to the

genre place upon the poet: as Thomas Lockwood hris notcd, the audiencc that becomcs interested in die satiiist's own personality "may now want to isolate (and possibly punish) him

while he continues to try to cal1 their attention to his v i ~ t i r n . " ~ ~ ~

Even the genial Horace is obligcd. as we have secn. to evade an accusation of malice: Juvenal is aIso careful to employ subtle evasions within his first satire: his resolution to üttack only the dead represents one very practical way of avoiding retnbution and accusations of self-

Advice to Mr. White Who Engrav'd the 7 Bps: 1688." ( 169 1). BL MS Harl. 73 17 fC 125'-26'. Ils

"The Augustan Author-Audience Relationship: Satiric vs. Comic Forms." ELH 36

( 1969): 652.

interest and envy. A sirnilar function is pertormed by Juvenalian indignurk~.whiçh is trcaied as ;in almost autonornous entity: in the larnpoon "Utile Dulce" (1681). the satirist is almost uninvolved: But when I do r d . from off Parnassus top. Th' officious Sisters hast to help me up. Words of themselves do into order drop And smoothly say that S' John is a Fop. Or wou'd E of a h o u s Cuckold tell. My hand inspir'd strait wntes down A r ~ n d e l l . " ~

Altematively. it was possible to disarm a potentially cntical audience with shows of modcsty: anticipating objections to his own sharp invective. the Eürl of Mulgrave's "Essay on Satyr" concludes with a disingemous tone oT self-mockery: 1 who so course and humble seem to bc Now my own Pride and Vanity can see

While the Worlds Nonsense is so sharply shown Wec pull down others to sett up our own That we may Angclls seem WC pain1 'em Elvcs And are but Satyrs to sett up our Selves.'" Many of the themes employed in attacks on satire appcar in thex lincs: the satirist admits to "Pride and Vanity." and his assault upon the viccs of othcrs is rcvcaled even to himself as an attempt to raise his own stature by the min of the repuutions of othcrs. This themc is to bç hund in a more explicit and pcrvasivc forrn in the "satirist-satitized" poems of Elizahethan writers likc Hall and Marston, as Alvin Keman notes: diese auihors draw attention to the "irnperlcctions of the satinst himself, and may purposely complicate . . . satire hy including such clements" (Cankered Muse 244-45). The Elizabethans. Ronald Paulson has suggested. "wcre interestcd in

the satirist as a man. a conssiousness. and individualist poscd againsi stock typcs": latcr

Il6

BL MS Harl. 73 19 ff.65'-66'; Wilson 49-55.

'"

BL MS Harl. 69 13 f. 17'; POAS Y& 396-4 13.

seventeenth-century critics tended. for this reason. to regard Elizabelhan satire "as an acadernic s howcvcr. lacks the exercise rather than a practical tool for retorm." ' t ~ u l g r a v e 'self-portrait. complexity and candour to challenge our perceptions of the satirist: the passage Iùnctions instead

as an apologia. a strategic attempt to sofien our response to the poem's willhl nastiness. and deflect O u r attention away from the satirist by anticipating and ameliorating potcntially hostile reactions. It is rhetorical rathcr han aesthetic. an attempt to cvadc rathcr than inviic scrutiny. Hostility to a satire could. and did. iake many I o n s . sorne of them violent:

Beiieve me. tis an évil Trade to rail. The angry Pocts hopes do often hil. While the Ambitious to y' Skyes do climh. Lnstead of Bays, a Cudgel oîl does tind: Some Lines. for being prais'd when they were read Were once a Cause of Dryden's broken hcad. ("Utile Dulcc" L6J') Mulgrave's carefully phrased apologia did little to assuage the outrage ol at leas[ onc ol the victims of "Essay on Satire." for it has long Deen believed that it was l'or his supposed role in wiiting this pocrn that Dryden was cudgelled in Rose ~ l l c ~ . ' 'Anthony '' à. Wood. desçrihing ihc circulation of the satire in manuscript around London in "No\?.(or bcl01-e)an. 1679." wrotc that the poem's "many gross Retlections . . . on Lirïloiiw Dutçhess of Porrs~~torrrh and John W i l ~ w E. r

' 1 8 The Fictions of Satire (Baltimore: John Hopkins UP. 1967) 89. Sec also Raymond Macdonald Alden, The Risr of Forritni S d l r in Engirrnd. Univcrsity of Pcnnsy lvaniii Serics in Philology, Liienture and Archaeology 7.2 (Philadelphia: U OC Pennsylvania P. 1899) '136-38. Ejner I. Jensen. "Hall and Marston: The Rolc of the Satiiist," SurAl 4 ( 1967): 72-83. and Sandra Clark, The Eiixrberhan Partiphkter~x(London: Athlonc P. 1983) 12 1.

See John Vci-ney to Sir Ralph Verney, Novembcr 27. 1679. in Historical Manuscripts Commission. Swenrh Report, Pt. 1 (London: Her Majcsty's Stationery Oflice. 1879) 477. Mulgrave was suspected by Edward Cooke. howevcr: sce his letter to the Duke of Omondc. November 22. in Historical Manuscripts Commission. Culenhr- of the M(muscripts of the Marquess of Ortnonrle, (Loirdon: Her Majesty's Stationeiy Office. 1908) N.S. 5: 242.

of Rochesier" prornpted "onc or both" of these to hirc "three Men to cudgel" Dryden:"'

"they

eitècied their business in the said Coffee-House at 8 of the Clock at Night on the 16th of Dec. 1679" (Wood 2: 804-05).The threat o l violence was a very red one.'" Another hazard faced by satirists was the potential for poiiticai and legal rculiation."' When the satirist hirnself was unknown. action w u IrequentIy taken againsi the puhlisher:"'

'"

See James A. Winn. John Dryden crnd His World (New Haven and London: Yale UP. 1987) 325-29. Luttrell wrote that "'tis thought to be done by order OS the dutchessc of Portsmouth" (1: 30). In the 1680 "Satyr." BL MS Hari. 6913 f.69'; Wilson 36-40. the satirist defies Portsmouth's "strong Ruffians" whom "shee can trust I As well to serve hcr Malice as her Lust." For other theones. see David Hdey. "John Drydcn: Protestant in Mÿsqucradc?" Cithrit-cr 30.2 (199 1): 10-25 and POAS Yale 1: 396-4U.

"' John Tutchin was said (incomctly) to have dicd as a result of injuries inllicied by the hirelings of one of his satiric victims in 1707: Cor this and a general discussion OS dic thrcats Làçed by satirists. sec the Reiirw for 13 July. 1708, in Defoe's Reiirw-, 22 bks. (New York: Columbia UP. 1938) 5: 18 1. and Gilcs Jacob's The Puericd Rqisrc.~..2 vols. (London. 17 19-20) 2: 309.

'"

See Frcderick Seaton Siebert. F~-ecdomof the Press i ~ England i (Urbanü: U of Illinois P. 1952) 179-304. J. Walker. "The Censorship of the Press During the Reign of Charles II." Hisrorv N.S. 35 (1950): 219-38. C. R. Kropl: "Libel and Satire in the Eightccnlh-Century," ECS 8-(1974-75): 153-68. Susan Staves. Plcyvrrs' Scrpruts (Lincoln and London: U of Nebraska P. 1979) 95-98 and pcissim. and George deforcst Lord. "Satire and Scdition." Clissicctl Presencrs in Sei~entrenth-CrnttoyEnglish Portry (New Haven and London: Yale UP. 1987) 107-44. The expiration of the Licensing Act in 1679 led to a llurry of açrivity hy satinsts and polemicists: see Timothy Cnst "Governrncnt Conirol or the Press aiier the Expiration of thc Printing Act in 1679." P~iblishingHistor-y 5 (1979): 49-77. and Phillip Hmh. Petzfor rr P w c 3236.

"' Sieben lists 20 occasions whcn publishew were tricd [or libel between 1660 and 17 14 (269n 17). See Nat Thompson's account of his persecu tion in A Choicr Collection o f 180 b y i l Songs sigs. [aZV-3'1.and in A Collection of 86 &il Poerns (London. 1685) sigs. [A3'-71. See also The Mosr Rematkcrble Trials of Nathrinicl Thompson. Wiilicrm Pciine. Johil Fmcrli (London. [ 16821). The TpuI of Nnrltaniel Tho~~ipson. WilIium Puin. and Johi~Fm~cell(London. 1682). Thr TI-I of Nathanael Thompson, John Fareivrll. Wiilium Pain (London. 1682).An Accoc~ntof the Pt-ocredings againsr Ncrt. ntompson. MI: Flint-rll, & MI: Pcziiw (London. 1682). and The Sentence of Nathanid Thornpson, Williant Pain m d John F U I - w r l([London]. 1682). For the tribulations OC the Disscnting publisher. Francis "Elephant" Smith. sec Henry R. Plorner. A Dictiona~yof the Printrrs oncl book sel lei*^ . . .fruiti I668 to 1725. 1922 ([Oxford]:

indeed. even the disuibutors of manuscript larnpoons wcre pcrsccutcd."'

At the best times. as

Matthew Prior pointed out. satire. "however agreahle for the present to the Writcrs and Incouragers o f it docs in time do neither of thcm good. considering the uncenainty of Fortune. and the various changes of Ministry. wherc every Man as he resents may punish in his tum of Greatne~s.""~Libel laws and the Licensing Act of 1662 made the producers of lmpoons and satires. especially those in opposition to the government. vdnerable to tcgal action: Samuel Butler's notebooks include the observation that "our modern Satyr has cnough to do. to sccurc ~ age provided many himself against the Penaltys of Scandalurn Magnatum. and ~ i k l l s . " "The

examples of the dangers of involvement with seditious or libclous satire. Most ominous was the fate of the Whig satirist Stephen Collegc. tricd and exccuted in 168 1 for. in pari. his au thorshi p o l

Bibliographical Society. 1968) 273-74.

''

Robert Julian. who ran a scriptorium. was chargcd with. and convicied for. writing and publishing "Old Rowley the King" in 1684. Sec Luttrell 1: 309 and 3 19-20, and "Julian's Fünvell to y' Muscs" ( 1685). BL MS Harl. 73 19 ff. 1Y6r-97r; Wilson 138-40. I n "To Cap: Wmop" (1686). Lenthal Warcup. Julian's rival as "Secretary to thc Muses." is warned "olJulianlshie beware. / More Secret be. or you may loosc an Ear." BL MS Harl. 73 19 1:197': Wilson 159-65. See also Hammond. "Censorship in Manuscript Transmission" 39-62. For Julian. see Mary Claire Randolph. "'Mr. Julian. Secretary OF the Muses1: Pasquil in London." N&Q 184 ( 1943): 2-6. Bricc Harris, "Captain Robert Julian. Secretary to the Muscs." ELH 1 0 ( 1943): 294-309. and Judith Slater. "The Early Career of Caplain Robert Julian. Secretary to the Muses." NdtQ N.S. 13 ( 1966): 260-62. For Warcup. see B k e Hams. "Letter to C------ W MLN 49 ( 1934): 46-47.

."

"Heads for a Treatise upon Learning." The Lirercrp W o k of Morfheit. Prior. eds. H. Bunder Wright and Monroe K. Spears. 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon. 1959) 1 : 583. Sec dso Dryden's account. in a letter to Rochester ( l66ï?). of an imitation of Boileau hy Ethcrege. who. "changing the French names for English. read it so often that it came to theii- cases who wcrc concerned; and forc'd him to leave off the design e'rc it was half tinish'd" (Ward [O). I3

Prose Obsenwions 2 16; according to Siebcn. "No single method or rcstiicting the press w u as effective as the law of seditious libel" (269).

78 the anonymous satire A Rarre Show."'

College persisted to the day of his excçution in denying

any role in the authorship of the pamphlet. but his protestations availed him nothing;'" despite a retum of Ignoramus by a London jury. College's trial was movcd to Oxford in July. where he was

speedily condemned by a packed jury. and executed on Augusi 3 1. 168 1.'" Equally disturbing was the fate of the republican political theorist Algernon Sidney. who was condcmned to death in 1683: his tnal demonstrated that the government was willing to procced cvcn wherc the work in question had not been disseminatcd to che p ~ b l i c . ' ' ~ Sidney's crime was to have ken h u n d in possession of some pnvate notes on the subjeçt OC Filmer's Porririrchri: hc was condemncd under

a law dating from the reign of Edward III which made "the cornpassin- or imagining the dcach ot'

"' He was d s o accused of plotling to assassinaie thc King. a charge Shadwcll mocked in Some Reflecrions 18. See The Speech u n d Cm-ringeuf Srepheii Colledge (London. 168 1 ) 3. " 9 Tt-ue Copy of the Dying Wor& of Mt-. Strp/tril Cuiirgr (London. 168 1 ) 1. Thc trial and execution of "the protestant joiner" spawned a Iluny OC pamphlets and satires: sec also A Letter fror~zM L Stephrn Colledge (London. 168 1). A Lerter- Wrirtenf/-m?iO.rfortl& MI- Srepheu Colledge (London, 168 1). A Lutter Wrirten f>.om rhe Toiiw bv MI: S~rplzrnCulleclgr (London. 1681), The Trial of Stephen College (London. 168 1 ) and POAS Yale 2: 348-52. ' 3 For the political context of College's trial. x e B. J. Rahn. "A Rri-rre Shoii. -- A Rare Cartoon: Revolutionary Propaganda in the Treason Trial of Stcphen Collegc." in Korshin, cd.. Studies in Change and Revoolurion 77-98. Harth. "Legends No Histories" 20-24. John Kcnyon. The Popish PIot (London: Heinemann. 1972) 24 1-42, and CSPD Cliur-les11 22: pmsini.

Sir Roger L'Estranp attempted to overcome the prohlcrns poscd hy anonymously published seditious works (including those in manuscript) by prosccuting the possessor of any such works: "whoever shall reccive. and Concede üny such Libell. wilhout giving noticc thcreof, to some of his Matyes Justices, within a certain spacc of time alier the rcccipt or it: let him sunèr as an Abettour of it, & if he shall not produce y' pcrson of whom he had it. let him sul'tér as y' Authour of it." Quoted from Harold Love. "Scnbal Texts and Literary Comrnunities: The Rochester Circle and Osborn b. 105," SB 42 (1989): 230. ''O

the king" high treason.'"

A poem entitled "A New Song Ior the Times" underlincd the threai that

this precedent set for satirists:

Algernon Sidney, Of Commonweaith kidncy. Compos'd a damn'd libel (ay. rnany. was it!) Wnt to occasion II1 blood in the nation. And therefore dispers'd it al1 over his closet'" The faith of the anonyrnous author of "Letter to iulian" ( 1681). that "Twas ncvcr known in any time / That one was hang'd for wri ring Rhime." seems sadly misplaced. '" Anonymity was one evasive responx to such threiits (although this usually provoked cunosity and s p e ~ u l a t i o n ) ; 'it~could. as well. shicld the satinst h m thc il1 repuution that association with satire could generate. Charles Sackville. the sixth Earl of Dorset. was the author

of a varicty of panicularl y savage and lihcllous lampoons. His attaçk upon Edward Howard. in "On the Same Aulhor upon his New Ut----" ( 167 1). wüs charactcristiçlilly vicious:

'" For details on Sidney's conviction and execution. sec Jonathan Scott. Algr~.tinttSid~land the Restot-arion Crisis, 1677-1683 (Cambridge: Cam bndgc UP. 1 99 1 ) 320-47.

'"

"A New Song for the Times." A Second Collecrion of The rVrii-rsr oitcl M u s t bigur~iuus Poems, Soryes, Songs, &c (London. 1689) 12.

BL MS Harl. 73 19 1'. 17 1'; Wilson 13 1-37. Sec also Rubshokeli Vc~pirlczns(London. 169 1 ) : "But siwe a Pocnz is crceptud still: / No Lait-s rouch thrit: who-r.likr rc Chmccry Bill. / Inwntion, Truth, and Reusun both supplies: / Nor ntusr wr crnswrfor Abuse crnd L y s " ( I O ) . lJ'

'" See Harnmond. "Anonymity in Restoration Poctry." 137. and the cornments oi'the author of The Second, Fourth, und Srwnrll Sanrs of Monsirio Boilrcii~I~~titrîrecl (London. 1696): "There are a thousand People perhaps . . . will be so inquisitive as to ask who is the Author. 1 presume. not out of any particular Curiosily thay have to he acquaintcd with the Person. hut purely out of custom" ( sig. [A37). A related straicgy was pxudonymous publication. which was not. however. always intended to obscurc authorship: sec Margarct J. M. Ezell. "Reading Pseudonyms in Seventeenth-Century English Coterie Litenturc." EL 2 1 ( 1994): 11-25.

Thou damn'd Antipodes to common sense. Thou Fuyle to Fluence! prithee tell from whence Does al1 this mighty Rock of dullness spring. Which in such b n d s tthou to thc Stage dost bring? (Rochester 1680 90) Yet Dorset had a reputation for good-nature and reticence: Gilbcrt Burnct dcscri bed hirn as "a generous good natured Man" ( 1: 264).'" Dorset çirculatcd his lampoons pnvately in manuscript. and took some care to dissociate his narne from them: as Briçe Harris notes. "Had any largc nurnber of readers associated hirn with these poems between 1680 and 1700. his contemporary reputation for gentleness and good nature rnight have ~uflèred.""~Sometimes the social consequences of association with one's own libels could be more serious: Rochester was banished from the court in latc 1673 for accidentdly delivering into Charles' hands his inFarnous "Sceptre" ~arnpoon."~On occasions. satiric skirmishes cauld evcn rcsult in faialities: a larnpoon skirmish between Robert Wolseley and William Wharton led. on Decernher 9. 1687. to a duel in which the laner was ki11ed.l'~ As Pnncess Mary wroic ol' thc incident sornc months later. "'tis a

" 5 Sce also Joseph Brownc's Sr. J(i/itrs'.s Prrrk: A Sccty-. in S t m TI-crcrs.2 vols. (London. 1715). which celebwm "Dorset'sgentlc Naturc. / His Wit and Humour" (2: 246); Pope similarly opined that Dorset was "a food-humourcd. good man." (Spcnce 1 : 2 K ) . 202). Burnet noted that "Never was so much il1 nature in a pen as in his. joined with so much good nature as was in himself' (1: 264). while Rochestcr more lamously described hirn as the "hcst good Man. with the worst Natur'd Muse" ("An Aliusion tc, Horace" 1.60).

The Poems of Charles Sackiille Sixrh Enrl uf Dorsrt (New York and London: Garland, 1979) x i x . 'M

See John Harold Wilson. ed.. The Rochester-Saville Lrtters (Columbus: Ohio Staic UP. 1941) 12- 17 and David M. Vieth. "Rochester's 'Scepter' Lampoon on Charles 11." PQ 37 (1958): 424-32. 'j7

""ee

Bnce Harris. Charles Sachille Sixrh Em-1 of Dorset. Illinois Studics in Lmguage and Literature 26 (Urbana: U of Illinois P. 1940) 1 10-12. Thc pocms that lcd io thc duel arc pnnted in POAS Parr 111 1-2 1. dong with Dorset's account of the quamel. "The Duel" (22-33).

81

cruel thing io hazard both body and sou11 for a jest.""'

In a vcry real xnsc. this is prcciscly what

many satinsts did every tirne they put pen to paper.

The satirist's evasions were not. however. prompted only by Ièar of legal action c?r the cudgels of hired thugs: there were also aesthetic and polemic rasons for avoiding responsibility. A satire dismisseci as intemperate and maiicious gossip was unlikely to effcct relom. or change

reader's attitudes towards the persons satirized. Satirists and sympathetic critics therefore employed sweeping strategies chat attempted nothing less than a redehition of the genre. Thcse new definitions tend. in almost every case. to shift attention away liom the tigurc of the satirist. focusing attention upon formal qualities of the genre. or upon the relationship betwecn satire and objective standards of truth and morality. Thomas Creech. in the prefatory remarks to his translation of Horace. remarked that "il1 Nature" is "cornnion&rhoughr a necessa,? ingredienr" of satirc (sips. [A6"')). an ÿssumpUon he

imrnediately challenges: "Asfor il1 Nurure. Horace requires none. nu^- clisclriints ir in o S u p r i x his sharprst touches, ifir-e belierr borh hinlself: and thosr rhur besr undersrood him, crr-r innocent

Wuggery" (sig. [A71). Horace is die mode1 of just and objective satire: against him. and lhox

who apply his merhods. are ranged those Creech accuses of "dirring one A h ' s Fucicr. c m 1 bespottering unother." Such. he says are "like Mud-Dogs" (sig. [A7']). The [rue satirist reactcd

with impartial seventy to objectively verifiable instances of vice: the rolc of personal animus. and indeed of agency. is carefully repudiated. John Phillips. in A Refr'ectiort on our Modern Poe-. characterizes the devclopment of scumlous satire as a Iùnction of historical change. a dccay of a legitimate genre:

"' 13 February, 1688 to Lady Forester:

quotcd from Harris. Eurl of Dorset 1 12.

Sarÿr. which was a wholsorne Remcdy. Prescrib'd to cure a People's Malady. When prudently apply'd doth Good produce; But as al1 Goa& are subject to abuse, So this of Late no Publick Cure intends, But only serves to black Mdicious ends. We dip our Pens in Goil when e é r we Write. And al1 our lnspirnrion is but Spire. (7) Significanrly, Phillips' only mention o f the agency OC the satirist is a negative one: when wieided by one who is motivated to "black Malicious ends" by "Gall"and "Spitc." thc gcnrc is corrupted.

Both Creech and Phillips appropriate the language habitually cmploycd by critics of invective verse in order to Iegitimate a certain kind of satire: they conccde much in ordcr to protect the genre. The distinction between rnalicious satire and that which is just and objectively m e manifests itself in many ~ a y s ; ' ' 'one ~ of the most t'icquent appcars in die formalizcd distinction between satire and lampoon. Edward Phillips' The New Wor-Idof English Words

(1658) defines lampoon as "ri kinde of Drolling Poem. or Pamphlet. wherein any person of the "Lampoon"). As Phillips' definition. present age. is mentioned with reproach. or scudity" (S.\.. with its mention of "scumlity." hints. lampoon is more rnalicious than satire. It is. as Elisha Colcs' An English Dictionory makcs clear. "a likl in verse.""' Lampoon is particular. but pmicularity

in satire also had. as we have secn. its champions. Charles Gildon's dcfençe of pürticularity in satire rests upon an unspoken distinction hetween satires that use particular rctlcctions as a means to an end. and those that, "perverced by Passion or Int'rcst." arc solely intcnded to humiliate the

'O See Richard Fiecknoe's Charmer "Of Raillerie": "Thcrc is as much difference betwixt Raillerie and Snprs. Jesring and Jeerirzg. &c. ris betwixt gcrllant~yand Clort.nishnesse; or betwixt a gentle Accost and mile Assaults" (30).

S. v. "Lampoon." Libel was employed synonymously with lampoon: Coles delines it as "an invective or slanderous Writing." Sec also Poericd Rflections on cr Lrrtr Poem 4. 141

intended target (Miscrlluneous Letters 4); lampoon. then. is distinguished tiom satire not by virtue of their respective targcts, but by their differing intenis. Richard Blackmorc. smarting liom Samuel Ganh's attack upon himsell and his kllow "Apothecaries Physicians" in The Dispensco-v

(1699). draws this same line in A S a p r agciinst Wit (1699) whcn he discriminates betwcen Dorset's just satire and that of "lampooners" Iike Ganh. whose business is " to Rail" at innocent victims: "Let km proceed and make your Names a Sport / In leud Lampoons. hcy've Time and Leisure For't. / Despise their Spite" (8).14'

The word larnpoon was itself a rclativcly reçent addition to the English language: the earliest date furnished for the noun in the OED is 1645. The date of the term's llrst rcçorded appearancc in English is signiiicant. coinciding as it does with an historie shift away liom hoth the academic satires characteristic of the Elizabethans and the oldcr tradition of mcdicval cornplaint. and towards the more occasional and particular vcsse t'om that Kirk Combe has called "politicized neoclassical ~atire."'~' Cleveland was the most intluential and important pioncer of this new trend.'"

Partiçular satire was not entirely new: thc 1st Dukc (if Buckingham had bccn

"' See also Dennis' Esscry upon Publick Spirit:

"particular Satyrs. if thcy arc just Satyrs. [are] prefcnble by much to Lampoons or Libcls: That only can be call'd a just Saryr. whosil Censures are always true; but that which endcavoun to dccry truc Merit. out ol' Maliçc. or Passion. or Interest. is in spite of popular Applausc a Lampoon. and an infamous Libel" (77). For the background to Blackrnore's poriomachici with Garth. see Hany M. Solornon. Sir Richcod Blackntore. Twayne's English Authors Sencs 289 (Boston: Twaync. 1980) 65-73 and p n s s i i ~ ~ . Despite his personal animus against Garth, Blackmore's sentiments in A Scrryr rrgninst Wit arc consistent with those expressed elsewhere. especially in Essrlys iipo12 S r i ~ o Siibjrcts: l sec above.

'"

"The New Voice of Political DissenkWin Connery and Combe. eds.. Throrizing Sritiw

14.1

A. D. Cousins. consciously cndorsing a "commonplacc." suggests that "rhcrc is no

9 1. innovativc t'ormal verse satire between Marston and Clcveland." "Thc Cavalics World and John Cleveland," JCP 78 (198 1): 61. See also Brian R. Moiris, "Satisc L'rom Donne tu Marvcll."

the target of a great deal of invective poetry in the 1620s."" and ballad satires. usually the product

of a popular radier h a n "literary" milieu. frequentiy attacked named individuals.'" Doublless the crisis of the late 1630s and 40s encouraged an increase in the incidence of particular satire: David Undewood. wnting of popular culture in Dorset. Wiltshire. and Sommet. has suggested that it was the "early years of Charles 1's reign" which were "the crucial period of politicization": "By

1627 the circulation of subversive wntings had becorne ominously cornmon." "" At the same time. the growing efficiency with which new was disseminauid made paniculür and iopical rckrcnce

more viable. as the potential audience for such satire &came berter informed."'

Metaphvsical Puenu. Stratford-upon-Avon Studies 1 I (London: Edward Arnold. 1970) 2 1 1-36 and Paul Korshin's Frorrt Concord tu Dissent (Menston: Scolar P. 1973). which sêcs in the satiric verse of Cleveland the inception of a "poetics of dissent" (9). 145

See Poerns and Sangs Reluring to George Villiers. Dukr of Buckingh~itn.cd. Fredcnck

W. Fairholt. Percy Society 29 (London, 1850). J. Peter 1 19-2 1. and Gerald Hamrnond's Flwring Things (Cambridge M A and London: Harvard UP. 1990) 19-66. For the popular satire of the penod. see also W. Keith Thomas. "The Place of Laughter in Tudor and Stuart England." TLS (Jan. 21. 1977) 77-8 1. Bellany. "'Rayling Rymes." in Sharpe and Lake. eds.. Ciilrrrre cirtcl Polirics 285-3 10. and Pauline Croft. "The Reputation of Roben Cecil: Lihsls. Politicai Opinion and Popular Awareness in the Early Seventecnth Ccntury." TRHS 6th Senes. 1 ( 199 1 1: 13-69.

'""allads frequently exercised the prity grudgcs of the ohscurc: sec Adam Fox. "Ballads. Libcls and Popular Ridicule in Jacobran England." PP 145 ( 1994): 17-83 and Martin Ingram. "Ridings. Rough Music and Mocking Rhymes in Early Modem England." Pup~îlor Culture in Seventeenth-Centu- Englunù. 1985. ed. Barry Rray (London: Routlcdgc. 1988) 17892-

'"

Revel. Riot, und Rebellion (Oxford: Clarendon. 1985) 12 1.

See Bellany 288-92. Thomas Copswell. "The Politics OS Propaganda: Charles 1 and the People." JBS 29 ( 1990): 187-215. Richard Cust. "News and Politics in Early SevcntecnthCentury England." PP 1 12 ( 1986): 60-90. and Michael Frearson. "The Distribution and Readership of London Conntos in the l6Ns." Serials ciml Thrir Rrudrrs 1620-1914. eds. Robin Myers and Michael Hanis (Winchester: SL Paul's Bibliographies. 1993) 1-25. For a discussion of the dissemination of Royalist propaganda and news during the 1640s. sce P. W. Thomas. Sir John Berkenhead 1617-1679 (Oxford: Clarendon. 1969) 45-64. Iniercstingly. the Duke of

The appearancc of satires like "The Rebell Scot" created for defenders of satire an immediate crisis of image."" The fierccly panisan and highly particulÿr nature of the satires generated by the Civil War meant that the genre was now. as never berore. vulnenhlc to accusations of malice. self-interest. and Sraudulence. n i e development of the distinction between lampoon and satire came at exactly the opportune moment to providc a temporary defcnce against such accusations: it was expedient to concede the potentiai for abuse. whilc mainiaining that

particularity could be cmployed as a legitimate satiric to01.'~~ The invention of the idea OC lampoon was a tale of a. tub. which provided critics of satire with an easy target while simultaneously deflecting attacks upon "legitimate"salire. It is this process that wc tind at work in Dryden's discussion of lampoon in his "Discourse" ( 1693). His initial attitude to it is one of condemnation: that "son of Satire. which is known in Englnnrl by the Namc o f Lampoon. is a dangerous sort of Weapon. and for the most part Unlawful. WC have no Mord right on ihc Reputauon of other Men. 'Tis iÿking from thcm. what wc cannot restore to thcm" (59). Dryden's opening comments virtually equate piirticularity with moral wrong; thcre arc. howevcr. a[ l e s t

Newcastle urged Charles II in 1659 to "Sorbid Eyther Domesticke or foraync ncws" so as 10 "Cook the nation & quiett state speritts." Irleology and Politics on the &ive of Re.srotatio~l: Newcastle's Advice to Charles II, ed. Thomas P. Slaughter (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. 1984) 56.

'" See for example the comments in Mercurius Anti-Britcinnicirs [31 ( 18 August. 1645). which distinguishes between the satire of Mercur?cts BI-itanicusand "tïner Invectives" by characterizhg the former as "a kind of boysterous Gall. which makes hem venemous. not sharpe. . . . There is as much difkrence, betwcen his Invectives. and a truc Satyre. as betwccn the pnck of a Needle, and the biting ofa Mad-Dogge. the one is dl poynt. the other al1 Rage" (25). 'O See the distinction made in Tarler 242. which seems io espouse geneialicy. but actually relies upon an apprehension of the satirist's intent: "when the Sentence appears lo arisc liom Personal Hatred or Passion. it is not then made the Cause of Mankind. but a Misundcrstanding betwcen Two Pcrsons" (3: 244).

two allowable situations that can admit of larnpoon. although these. he cautiously adds. cannot "alwaysjustify us" (59). The firsi of these is when revenge is intended hecause "we have been affronted in the same Nature. or have becn any ways notoriously abus'd. and can make our selves no other Reparation." Dryden. however, is uncorn fortable with this concession. and adds immediately that "in Christian Charity. ail Offences arc to be Corgiven" (59). Dryden's second

exception relates to attacks on one who "is becorne a Publick Nui~ance":'~~ Tis an Action of Vinue to make Examples of vicious Men. Thcy may and ought to be upbraided wiih their Crimes and Follies: Both for their own amendment. i l they are nor yet inconigible; and Lor the Terrour olothers. to hinder them from falling into those Enonnities. which they sec are so severely punish'd. in the Peïsons of others. The first Reason was only an Excuse for Revcnge; But this second is absolutely of a Poet's Office to perform (60). A subtle shift. encapsulated in this 1 s t sentence. has occut~edin the argument. Sor our subjcct h a s

now tumed almost imperceptibly to that of formal verse satire itselC The pariicular attiick upon "vicious Men" is now treated. not merely as a justification for a desccnt to larnpoon. but ralher as a positive duty of the "Poec" Lampoons upon such men arc. in cffcct. not lümpoons nt all. but rather a legitirnate ernployment of the genre. Thc essence of the distinction hciwccn lampoon and satire. thcn. resides in the rolc OS thc ~atirist.'~'In thcory. the lampoon dciivcs its gcncsis.

151

See also Shippen's Modercrriorr Displrfd sigs. [A3'-4'1. and Edmund Waller's 1667

address to Parliament. in derencc of a libel then circulating: "Liberty of accusing. and no liberty of calumniating [are] the security of al1 nghts." Anchitell Grey. comp.. Debares of the House of Communs, 10 vols. (London. 1763) 1: 92; cited in Warren L. Chemaik. The Poerp of Litnirurion (New Haven: Yale UP. 1968) 50. For an opposing vicw. sec Marvell's The Rrherrrsal Transproskl. The Second P a n 161. and Wesley's Epistle ro o Friencl27. 1. 1W5. 15' As William Frost notes. "lampoons are distinguished from truc satire on cxua-literary grounds. To distinguish the true satirist from the falsely seerning one. the reader must make a judgment of the character of the produces." "Dryden's Theory and Practice of Satire." D I ~ I YY.'I I Mind and Art. ed. Bruce King (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd. 1969) 196.

87

impetus, and end from the personal dislike of the satirist for his or her target. while satire is the expression of an detached and impassive dislikc OC vice iisclf. tn priictice. of course. one reader's satire was another's lampoon: yet. even if the differcnces betwccn lampoon and satire were more apparent than real. it was a convenient tool to denigntc opposing satirists while detlccting cnticism away from "legitimate" (Le. allied or friendly) invective attacks. An equally important, if less immcdiately effective. means of rcdirecting the attention of

crirics of the genre away [rom the person of the satirist was thc atternpi to rc-cstablish the etyrnology of the term. As already noted. the older and widcly-held idea rhat "satirc" dct-ived frorn the mythical "satyr" or from the Greek satyr plays had an important influence upon the way that the genre was written and received. It was only afier 1687. with the publication of Dacier's "Preface" to the Euvres drHoruce that thc "satynis" derivation for the rem was _eiadually ~upplanted.'~'Dacier's insistence upon the correct etymology for "satire" was more chan an academic exercisc. The new ctymology. as he saw. necessitated a revised undcrstanding ol' the genre as well: Dacier poinicd oui that sunwu çould also bc applicd to torms of priiisc. "whcreas we have had respect only to the tïrst, and gcneral Usc. whiçh has bccn made of i t in the bcginning to mock. and deride" (sig. [BSY). His argument had IWO important corollancs: satire need not be rough and unmannerly in the mannes of Greck woodland satyrs: what was more. it might cven

I5%lkin 28. Sec Isaac Casaubon. De Scxty-icaCI-rc~cunun Poesi et Ronronor-unz Sririr-cl. 1605. introd. Peier E. Medine (Delrnar: Scholars' Facsimilcs and Reprints, 1973) esp. 1 16-32 and 3 11-23. For the siuyr play. see De S(rtyicci 22-28 and pcrssim. Dana Fcrrin Suuon. The Grrrk Satyr Play. Beitriige zur Klassischen Philologie 90 (Meisenheim am Glan: Anton Hain. 1980) esp. 193-96, and Bernd Seidensticker. ed.. S~i~rspiel. Wege der Forschung 579 (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. 1989).

contain praise?

This was to have important implications Cor the stmcturc of formal verse satire.

which, as Mary Claire Randolph and. more rccentiy. Howard Wcinbroi have notcd. incrcasingly took on a bipartite form. with a bdance of both pnisc and blame.15' It was also to affect satiric tone. which was to become smoother and more genial in its critique oT vicc. While English satire had long ièatured sporadic passages of pmisc. the suggestion that praise was a formal component of satire justiticd a radical revision of satiric tone. and providcd

satirists with a swing tiction. a link with a more sympathetic and attrxtivc genre.'56 The gradua1 and subtle redehition of satire that followed on the hcels of thc estabIishment of thc correct etymology of the word made it more feasible to argue that satire reinlorced positive vinucs. thereby improving the image of the satitist and blunting the arguments of those who attacked satire as the venomous spewings of a rnalicious and spitehl mind. Anothcr important hcct of this

change is the fact that the derivation of "satire" had shiftcd Srom one that identiticd the genre. and

'"

Dryden. in the "Discourse." assens that "Thc Poct is hound. and that c.r Officio. t« give his Reader some one Precept of Moral Virtuc" (80). Sec also Sprat's commenu diat "truc Raille- should be a deïence Tor Goocl and Vitntous Works" ( H i s t o t -4 19). For Diydcn's indebtedness to Dacier. sec Amanda M. Ellis. "Horace's Influence on Diyden." PQ 4 ( 1925): 5759. 155

See Randolph. "Structural Design." and Weinbrot, "The Pattern or Formal Versc

Satire in the Restoration and the Eighteenth-Century," Eighteenrh-Centut? Surire 1 1-20. Thc views of both critics have bcen challenged by Petcr J. Schakel in "Dryden's Discu~rrseand 'SiPartite Structure' in the Design of Forma1 Verse Satire." ELN 2 1.4 ( 1984): 33-4 1. 156

Robert Gouid suggested that. evcn if satire "will not mend." the satirist "that wou'd / Convert the Vitious. then contirms the Good." A Suer againsr Wouing (London. 1698) 18. For the relationship of satire and panegyric. see Warren L. Chemaik's "Waller's Pïrnrgytic tu My Lord Protectur and the Poetry of Praise," SEL 4 (1 964): 109-24 and "The Hcroic Occasional Pwm: Panegyric and Satire in the Restoration." MLQ 26 ( 1965): 523-35. For a discussion of didactic theories of poems of praise h m the Renaissance through the eighteenth-century. sce 0. B. Hardison. The Enduring Monimlritt. 1962 (Westport: Greenwood P. 1973).

89 its practitioners. with a pcrsonified attitude. to one that was esxntially formalistic. Increasingiy.

the satirist was no longer a " ~ a t ~ r . " ' ~ ~ One other development in satire theory in the later decades or the seventeenth-ccntury contnbuted towards the formdization of the genre. As the two most inilucntial models for verse satire were Horace and Juvenal. it was natural that throughout the seventeenth-century criucs should define contemporary satire by perceived aftlnitics to one or other of the two Roman satinsts. The characreristics of two poets tended to be arranged in a scries of binaiy oppositions.

as is the prevalent pattern of Joseph Trapp's description of thc two in his Lrcrrous on Poe= (Latin 17 1 1- 19: English 1742): satire "is twotold; either the jucosr. as that of Horuce; or the serious. iike that of Jwencil. The former hiddcn. the latter open. That gcncrally mÿkcs Sport

with Vice. and exposes it to Ridicule: This probes it to the Bottom. and puts il to Torture" (277).

One set of opposing qualities that was gradually accepted as a means of conveniently classifying the distinctive styles of the Horace and Juvenal was that of comic vcrsus trigic satire.

The distinction was a relatively cornmon one in the seventeenth-ccntury. Daniel Heinsius. following Scdiger. had suggestcd the classifications in 16 17:""~r~den.

in his "Discoursc." had

'"

See however the letter "From a Lady at the Bath" in A Pcrcqrrerfr~onrWi/l's( 1701): "modem Satyrists" are "not like those of old. whom Painters reprcscnt with Asses Ears. and Goau Legs"; instead. they have "a Snake's Head and a Wasp's Breech." The Second Volrr~neof rhe Works of Monsiecir Voittrrr. 2nd ed. (London. 1705) 200. 158

In De S a p z Hot-crtiano Liber ( 1612), Heinsius claimed that "Horace amuses himself in the manner of comedy; Juvenal ofien strikes out in the manncr of tragedy. The former excites laughter. with the greatcst pleasure; the latter arouses horror and indignation in equal pans." Quoted from California Dryden 3: 573.

argued that " J w e n d Excels in the Tragical Satyre. as Hormr does in the Comical" (74).''" The most int'luential statement of the idea was. however, that of John Dennis. in his "To Matthew

Prior. Esq.: Upon the Roman Satirist" (172 1). in which it was argued that "the true Rumnn Satirc is of the Comick kind. and was an Imitation oC the old Athrnirrn Comedys. in which L~rciliirstint

signaliz'd himself, and which was aftenwards perfected by Horrrce." while " J ~ ~ ~ w afterwards crl started a new Satire which was of the Tngick kind." '" Dennis' charicterizalion associates tragic satire with Juvenal's high style and virulent attacks upon great vices. Comic satire. on the othcr hand. is exemplified by Horace's plain style. and his concentriation upon private foibles and tbllics: tragic and comic satire therefore correspond v e ~ yneatly with neoclassical views on the distinctions between comic and tragic drama. Dennis lixed satire in relation to two wellestablished genres. providing his two types with stable charxterisdcs that. in the context ol' neoclassical theories of genre. make sense. What distinguishes the tragic/comic distinction from such oppositions as snarlin," VCCS U S smiling satire. and miling versus rallying is that the older ciltcgories rel'crrcd to thc tonc of the satirist's voice: descriptive rather than taxonomical. they focused attention upon the agency of the

159

Dryden quotes Heinsius. who. he says. "urges in praise o l Horrrcu. that according to

the Ancient A n and Law of Satire. it shou'd be nearer to Comedy. than to Tragedy: Not declaiming against Vice. but only laughing at it" (69). See also Trapp 228-30 and 307-08. I60

Origirzol Lurturs (London. 172 1 ) 2: 432. In his sixth satire. Juvcnal adopts the analogy

with tragedy: "Our Satyre has put on / The lofty Buskin. And Old bounds out-gone I Our Sophoclerin throat yawnes out a Crime" (Holyday 104). Juvenal insists. however. that his satires are unlike stage trqedy because the latter are fictional. For a rnodcrn analysis of the ~ragic/cornicdistinction. see Harold Weber's "The Jestcr and the Orator': A Rc-examina~ionof the Comic and the Tragic Satirist." Gcrrrv 13 (1980): 17 1-85. and his "'Comic Humour and Tragic Spirit': The Augustan Distinction between Horace and Juvenal." CML 1 ( 198 1): csp. 280-89. which argues. from a different perspective from my own. that the distinction was part of the "public evasions and hypocrisies which disguised the pcrsonal aspccc" of satire (289).

91

satirist. The distinction between tragic and comic satire acccntuated instead matters of style and subject matter. As a result. this descriptive method reduces the prominencc of thc çharxtcristics of the satirist's voice. and lhereby isolates the genre more elfectively from any association with the

putative poet Sipnificantly. however. attempts to dcscribe satire in this way gcncrally break down. Dennis' description is typical in this regard. The categories OS tngic and çomic satire are. in the final analysis. most useful as descriptions of ihc distinctive approaches of the two most

important Roman satirists: wherc Horace "endeavours to conrct the Follics and E I T L and ~. epidemick Vices of his Reader. which is the Busincss of Comedy." Juvcnal "atcacks the pcmicious outngious Passions and the abominable monstrous Crimes of several of his Contcmporaries. or of

those who liv'd in the Age before him. which is the Busincss of Tragedy" (432). What Dennis concludes with is not an account o l two distinct suhgenres of satire. but rrither a descriptive sketch of the distinctive characteristics ot' the satire of Horace and Juvenal: it is as though attempts to banish the voicc and charactcr of thc satirist trom descriptions of the genre arc doomed to I'ailure. Everywhere and always. thc voicc of the satirist scsurhces to establish i r î dominance oves our expesience and perceptions of the genre. It was. linally. the task of thc individual satirist. rather than the critic. to addrcss this dangcrous tendency. and devise evasive strategies to counter the reader's tendency to read through thc satirc t« thc i'orccful and ol'teii unattractive personality that seemed to lic hehind it.

Chapter 2

"For Stones Doe Speake" : Satiric Prosopopœia

On September 11. 1656. Edward Hyde sent a letter to his colleague the Duke of Ormonde that included an account of the reception of a recently-published prose pamphlet entitled A Letrer jkom a True and Lmvfidl Member of Parliainent (1656). This piece contained a carehlly argued

criticism of Cromwell's Declmtion OF October 3 1. 1655. which enacted tùnher punitive measures against Royalist sympathizers. Because it purponed to be written by a man who had fought with Parliament to curîail arbitrary govemment. its arguments against the wisdom. legality. and justice of Cromwell's harsh declaration must have camed a certain weight wih moderate supporters of the Protectorate. The pamphlet's comparison of the Lord Protector's methods of mle with thosr

of the overthrown monarchy were particularly çalculated to appeal to the more moderate sort: if after so much blood spilt and çalümities undergone by the people. to free them from Monarchique Govemmcnt. it should be now found most agrceablc to the Nature and temper of the Nation. to return to the same forme of subjection. there could be little douht, it would be much better to restore it to the Royal1 Person. to whom by the line of succession the unquestioned Right was dctivcd . . . than by continuing it in the hands of an Usurper.'

Hyde informed Ormonde that "there is a letter corne out to one ot' the Protector's CounciI which makes Cromwell mad, who swears that it is by Hollis Clr hat he will destroy him Tor it; Hollis is generally believed to be the author."' Hyde was disingenuous. for it was actually he. and not

'

A Letter from a True and Lnwfull Member of Parliatnent (n.p.. 1656) 59-60.

Quoted from Richard Ollard. Clm-endon und his Friends (New York: Athencum. 1988) 178; see W. Dunn Macray. ed.. Culendar of rhr C l n e n d o ~Stute ~ Pupers (Oxford: Clarendon. 1876) 3: 171.

Denzil Holles, who was the author of the piece.' Hyde was one of the Royalist party's chiel

propaganda writers both during and after the war. and produced a wide vuiety of pamphlets. speeches, and letters arguing t.he King's case.4 Perhaps his most intercsting contribution to the cause, however. was his use of forgeries and anonymous works like A Lrtter to sow dissension among the King's enemies. Hyde look pride in his abilities as a forger and mimic of style: in his Life, he recounts with obvious relish a wager made hy Charles I chat he could recognizc Hyde's style regardless of the subject matter. The King lost: Hyde forged a speech ascribed to Pembroke which fooled Charles so completely that he declarcd that "every word [Pernbroke] said was so much his own, thai nobody else could make it."' Graham Roebuck has written of Hyde's efforts in this vcin that he "may properly be considered the innovator of these new types of polemic in the ~eri0d.l'~ Hyde. however. can hardly daim crcdit for the invention of the litenry forgery:' nor w u he thc t k t propagandist of

For the attribution of this piece. see Graham Rocbuck. Clrrerttlon r i i d G h t r r i l Continiiip (New York and London: Garland. 1981) 95-96. and C r h n ï h -of Clrrrrntio~oilStcrtu Papers 3: 79. See Roebuck 1-96. Ollard 66 and pnssiin. and Joan E. Hartrnan's "Rcstyling the King: Clarendon Wri tes Charles 1.'' PSt 14.3 ( 1991 ): 35-59. ''

The Life of E C ~ ~ VEad C I >of; ~Clrirendun (Oxford: Oxlord U P . 1857) 1 : 136-37. Roebuck 73. who gives a full list of such works (74-96). Slevcn N. Zwickcr secs disguise as charactenstic of the politics and lirerature of die Restomtioii period. "Politics and Practice in the Restoration," Renciissrrnce Geizws. ed. Barbara Kiekr kwalski. Harvard English Studies 14 (Cambridge. MA and London: Harvard UP, 1986) 272-73.

' The prevalence of such forgeries allowed polemicists to undcrcut the encmy's use of captured documents: see John Taylor's accusation that Parliament had "contrivcd Lettcrs" or "new moulded them" to darnn the King. in his 77ze G e n e r d Coinpkiint of the Most Oppressrd. Distressed Commons of England ([Oxford]. 1645) 7 - 8 . Sec also Martin Llcwellyn's "A Satyr. Occasioned by the Author's Survey of a Scandalous Pamphlet Intitulcd. The King's Cabinet

the Civil War penod to ernploy such rnimicry in the service of his cause. Hyde's pamphlet of

course, relied upon the rcader's acceptance of its authenticity to succeed. but mimicry could atso be employed as a self-conscious literary device designed not to fool readers but to persuade and

entertain them: as Margaret Doody has noted. "Civil War poetry secs a s u g e of poems and

verses rendered as if in the enemy's voice."' Doody is not the only critic to notice this development: in fact. the modem notion of the satiric persona has developed in part from the growing awareness of this kind of venüiloquism in seventeenth- and eighteenth-ccntury satire.

More seldom noted is the fact that this "innovation" had. in tact. venerable precedents: rhetoricians would have recognized in such mimicry an example of prosopopcpia. This tigure was certainly a well-known one in the xventccnth-century: onc of the hller definitions of it is found in John Smith's The Mysterie ofRhrroriqrir Unwil'd ( 1657): Prosopopoeia is the feigning of a pcrson to speak. or the attrihuting of a person to the inmirnate creaturcs; as. when wc b i n e in pcrsons that are dead. or thc inanimate creatures speiking or hexing. &c. A figurative Exornation. when in our speech. what thing socvcr. which is is [sic] not a person. is Metaphorically brought and reprcxntcd as a person; or when the propenies of man are I'or similitude and agreeablcncss sake at~rihutcdunto other things; whence it is said that this form of speech animatcs and makcs dead men speak; or it is, When in our speech wc kign another person spcaking." Sornething of the variety of uses to whiçh prosopopr~iuc m be put is apparent in this description:

Opened," Men-Miracles. With Othrr Poenirs ([Oxford 1. 1646) csp. I O 4 and Pottcr 62-64.

The During Muse (Cambridge: Cambridge UP. 1985) 32. Stevcn N. Zwickcr maintains that "concealment and masquerade" were also characteristic ol' political and literary discourse after 1660. Politics and Lunguclge in Dqxlen S Port>? (Princeton: Princeton UP. 1984) L 3. T71e Mysterir ofRhetoriyite Unioil'd (London. 1657) 153-54. See also John Newton. An Introduction to the A n of Rhetorick (London. 167) 1 19. and Thomas Blount. The Acadentie of Eloquence (London, 1654) 44.

it includes. for example. a type of personiîïcation ("the inanimate crcatures speaking or hearing"). and is closely related by Smith and others to upostr-ophe (Smith groups these together as

examples of legistno. 8-9). By this means. the orator can represent the speech of his opponents.

of a dead authority. of inanimate objeçis. or of personitïed absutict ideas. As well. new and unfamiliar perspectives on the satiric subject can be offered.'" The figure of an injured nation rnay

be conjured up to denounce a political opponent. and Justice personilied çan çry out for vengeance against a male factor. Seventeenth-century employments of prosopopc~iaretlect this wide variety of possibilities.

One not uncommon form of satiric prosopopœiu features talking inanimate objeccs. usually çlosely associated with the satiric subject. On occasion. the objcct in question rnay bc a literaiy work

which speaks to its readers: in such cases. the point of the pi-osupop w i r 168 1's 'tories"' (47). Sec also Scott's "Restortition Process. Or. If This Isn't a Party. We'rc Not Having a Good Tirne." Albion 25 (1993): 6 19-37. and the responses by Richard L. Greaves, Gary S. De Krey, and James Rosenhcim in the same volume. Tim Harris, in "Party Turns? Or, Whigs and Tories Gct off Scott Fm." Albion 25 (1993): 58 1-90. aques that "Tories did use similar rhetoric to the Whigs." bccause they wishcd

his tone of forthrightness and reasoned moderation. signallcd by a slighdy mocking attitude toward political division. irnmediately puts the unaligned rcader ai easc:" Tis nor my intenrion ru mrrke un Apology for rny Potm: Sontr d l think it nreds no Exc~rsr:und orhrrs ivill ~.ecrivenonr. The Design. f U I I Z sio-r. is honesr: but hr bvho d r u w his Pen for one Purp. mrrst expecr ru n i d c Enmiirs of rhr othrt-. For, Wit rrnd Foo 1. are Conseq~rentsof Whig cind Tory: And r irrq:w i n is cr Knnve or-rrn Ass ro rhr contra- sitle. ( 3 )

Dryden wlls not afraid to identify hirnselfexplicitly as a mcmbcr of puty because he could do so in a manner that situated him outside of faction. thereby establishing his own credcntials as an honest and objective observer of events: as Steven N. Zwicker notes. he "admils vulncrability where it can do least d m a g c and by such tiankness aims io esuhlish greaicr credihiliiy" (Poiiricv

und Languagc 42)." Even more explicitly. he identifies himsclf with the moderates oî' cüçh party hy targeting them as his audience? if1 happen ro plrcrsr the more Modrrcrre SUIT. I sholl br srrw of fnn honesr Pcrr-ty and, in rd1 pl-obabiliry. of the brsr of Jdgrs: for; the lrcrst C u n c r ~ il. n riru conr17ton- rhr lecisr Curr-upt: And. I confess. I hoive I d in fOt* rhosr. by rrboting

"to recapture the middle ground from thc Whigs" (585. 583). a straiegy that ci)rrcspcinds with Dryden's own.

" Phillip Harth argues that Dryden cxaggeratcs politicai divisions in Absrrlrm trnd Achitophel and The Merkrll. and "cxacerbates the nation's divisions as a means of hcding them." In such a context. his own posture of moderation stems al1 the more attractive. "Thc Poet: Dryden's Public Voiçes." Nebr Homagr ru John D~-yïl~n. inuo. Allan Roper. eds. Phillip Harih and Ralph Alan Cohen (Los Angeles: William Andrews Clark Mernorial Library. 1983) 16. 18. 67

Zwicker has argued elsewhere that ihe literary polemics of thc period helped Loin and define party politics: sce "Lines of Authoiity: Politics and Literary Culture in thc Rcst»rüii«n." in Sharpe and Zwickcr. eds.. Politics of Discorrrse 230-70. 6' Cf. The Meridl 11. 248-5 1. and Dryden's stmcc ofcalculütcd modcration in "To My Honour'd Kinsman. John Driden" (1700). esp. 11. 17 1-83. See also Jerome Donnelly. "John Dryden and the Failure ol Political Catego~ies."SVEC 305 ( 1092): 1392-94 and David Wykcs. A Preface ru Dlyden (London: Longman. 1977) 69-70.

What is pcrhaps most intercsiing about this passage is the suggestion that a more scvere satire must. by its very nature. relinquish al1 daim to objectivity and imparùality. Moderite readers are repelled by satire that displays "too sharp an Edge": because the readcr who reacts with disgust or abhorrence to a sharp satirc is unlikely to be swayed. satiric sharpncss is a rhetoncal liability. Here. then. Dryden is cngaged in a strategic withdiawal. apparently çatering to those critics who viewcd satire as the unjust and partisan attacks of the malicious. but his retrmt is only partial. made to becter secure his own self-appointed role as good-naturcd Horatian satirist: a dcfence of Juvenalian satire is abandoned not because it is untenable. but bçcause concession strcngdiens the poet's rhetorical position as a man of rcason.'" Dcspitc his assurances to the contrary. Absolmt and Achirophrl docs. in Fact. contain muçh Juvenalian satirc: Dryden's later assertion that "Tis not bloody" ("Discourse" 7 1 ) notwithstanding. it is difticult ro imagine a more effectivcly brutal satiric assault han ihat launçhed againsi Buckingham (as Zirn~i)."'

69

James A. Winn sces in the poem a reconciliation of "the Chiislian ideal ou modcration and the political necessity for rcvenge" (D~yilen345). As McKeon points out. howcvcr. with reference to Dryden's rhetoncal stance in Annus Miwbilis. "the assertion of modcration docs not prove moderation . . . . what Dryden manifcaly adopis is not a 'moderate political position.' but the name and language of rnoderation, and he does so in order to argue for a position which may or may not be moderate" ( 18). George deForest Lord simiiarly suggests that "Dryden's 'moderation' tums out to be more manner than substance." "'Absalom and Achitophel' and Dryden's Political Cosmos,"in Miner. ed.. Dtylen 185. See also Stevcn N. Zwicker and Dcrek Hirst. "Rhetoric and Disguise: Political Laquage and Political Argument in Ahrilom und Achitophrl," JBS 2 1 ( 198 1): 39-55 and Zwicker's Politics und Lnnguuge 25-28. Raman Sclden suggests thar the portrait of Zimii "in respcçt of iwbcil rr-it is closer io Juvenal" han Horace because il is scornful and dircçtly judgcmccntal (English Verse Smire 37). 'O

Interestingly. Dryden's tactic is evocative of that uscd in a satire by a coun poct whose diegiances lay on the other sidc of the Exclusion controvcrsy. Thc Earl of Dorset. while a moderate Whig. despised Monmouth as much as he hated the Duke of York: in "Thc Right Honourable the E. of D-rs-t's Opinion of the Whigs and Tories" ( 168Za!) Dorset. like Dryden. situates himself betwecn the two factions: After thinking this fortnight of Whig & of Tory. This to me is the long & y' short of y' Story) They are al1 Fools. & Knavcs & they kcep up this pother. On both sides. designing to cheat one another." Having established his own impartidi ty. Dorset proceeds to savage hoih Monmou th and York.

Like Dryden. he does not allow his own ethical posture to interkre with his unçompromising criticism of his two satinc victims: York is an ugly. ill-natured "Bigot." and Monmouth a moronic "Fop." The conclusion damns both althouph. like Drydcn. Dorsct is perhaps a little harsher tu the opposing Party: Had 1 this sort Son. & this dangcrous Brother. I'd hang up the one. then I'd piss upon t'othcr. I'd Makc this thc long & y' Short of the Story: Thc Fools might bc Whigs. none but Knavcs should hc Torycs. (S- 104')

In thc linai analysis. Dorset's vchcmencc suhvens his attcmpt to position himscl!' in ihc middle. The shai-p invective displayed by Dryden in his charactcrizations notwithstanding.

Nid1 Rudd points out that "Dryden's fine raillery . . . io judge from thc characier of Zimri in Absalonl. entails z great deai more than the passing thrust which was Hor;ice's favouritc technique." "Dryden on Honce and Juvcnal." UTQ 32 ( 1963): 163. K. G. Hamilton similarly notes that Dryden's Zimri "could hardly be more direçtly abusive.'' Dtycleri cind the Poeay of Statement (St. Lucia: U of Queensland P. 1967) 4 1.

'' BL MS Harl. 73 19 t 103'; POAS Yole 2: 39 1-92. In Harl. 73 19. it is en ti tlcd "My Opinion." and datcd 1682.

however. Dryden does sustain throughout much of Absrrlorn arrd Achiruphd a tonc of Homtian moderation. Dryden's mode of voicc is similar to that or Cowlcy in T'ze P M I - i t mcrnd the Prrpi.sr;

here. however. the poet's efforts to rernain unobtrusive arc aidcd by the poem's narrative structure. which dlows him to disguise personal comrnentary as story-tclling. tïltcred through an apparently objective and impersonal medium of communication. At the samc timc. howcver. the effect of the personal. almost conversational. revclations of Diydcn's prclàtory notc "To thc Reader" linger in thc mind as the rcader progresses to the pocm propcr. His m iniaturc prosc essay serves as a framing device. eliciting sympathy and affection for Ihc poct evcn whilc obviating the need t'or a more intrusive satiric presencc within the poem ilself. He gives us. ai one

and the same rime. both the chatty Horitian gentleman and the irnpassivc histo~ilin.'~ A close reading o l both Dryden's prehtory rernarks and the body of his p w m rcvcals.

however. that a straight-forward distinction of thc two into Hordtiiin and Juvcnalian camps is simplistic." Whilc it is undeniably tme that "To the Reader" is more pcrsonal. and more Hora~ian. than the pocm iaclS. Juvenalian elemenls crcep into the Iormcr as well. hi.Drydcn consistcntly

plays Horatian cthos off against an implied. or thrcatened. Juvcnalian mode. Wc ohscrvc thc technique at work when Dryden cxprcsscs hope that rnattcrs arc not yct so hi.out (11' hand as to be unrernediable: "Things iwre not broiighr to c m E-rrrrntin \rArre I [rfr the Sro!?: Thetsr s r r m ~ .

Sec King. "Abscrlotn and Achirophrl" 79. and Zwiçker. Lines of Authoriry 154. Dryden's self-chancterization here contras& with tha~of Shaftesbury. who is an extrcmist. a "daring Pilot in extremity" (1. 159); Shaftesbury is. in this senx. cntircly unHoratian: scc Taylor Corse, "An Allusion to Horace in Absulor~tund Act~iiirophrl."N&Q N.S. 40 ( 1993):3 19-2 1. "

" Although it is Dryden's arnbiguous handling of the moral authority of David that he has in mind. Michacl Seidel comment chat "Dryden wanü the hest ol' Horatian and Juvcnalian satiric worlds" is a valid chanctcrization of the pocm as a whole (Smiric ?nheritcrncr 144).

yt. to

br rooi?z lefi for n Compos~rre:hereeIfrer-rhrre iwiy on& be forpip" (4). This secms likc

an appeal for reason and modcration. and a perîèct retleçtion or Dryden's Horatian ~ r h . s :Edward and Lillian Bloom. for example. have cited this passase as an examplc of Dryden's "compassion"

(Sarire's Pet-sunsii~~ Voicr 73). And yet. it is diftïcult not to read in the suggestion that "pity" may soon replace hope the prcsence of a veiled threat. Dryden's apparcntly cornpassionaic hopn rhu P t - e s ~ r r r i u nChrrrge of Popet- was publishcd hy Parkcr with his own A Prefllrcr Shrwittg Whar GI-01rt1dsThew Are of Feur.s rurd Jrciloirsir.~of Popri-?. in 1 672.

65 Sec D. I.B. Smith's discussion of thc irnportrincc of "hanter" as a m d c l for gcnieel raillery. in "Dryden. Marvell. and the Sources of Rcstoration Satire." Fo,ui?i 17 ( 1979): 2-9. Sec also Hugh Macdonald. "Banterin English Controversial Prox atier the Restcration." E&S 32 (1946): 2 1-39. Knox 208-2 1. James R. Sutherland. "Rcstoration Prose." Rusror-crtion and Augusron Prose (Los Angeles: William Andrews Clark Mernorial Li brary. [ 19561) 5-6. 16- 17 and Ian Watt. "The Ironic Tradition in Augusian Prose from Swiîl to Johnson." in thc samc volume. 20-27. For the related tradition derived from the Maiprelate tracts. sce Nigel Smith. "Richard Ovenon's Marpnest Trxrs: Towards a History of Levcller Style." PSr 9.1 ( 1986): 39-66

Bayes becomcs Drydcn again in Tom Brown's "Retlections on thc Hind & Paniher." printed with M m i n Clifford's Notes upon Mr. Dpdett '.Y Poei?is in Four Lutre,r ( London. 1687 ). itself an attack on Dryden's heroic drama which makcs much rckrcnce to T k Rchrcitwl. Brown's prose satire is clearly modelled on Marvell's. and brings ihc proccss ol' allusion hl1 ciirle by identifying Dryden's new-found Catholicism with Parker's Erastianism. 66

Marvell's purpose in The Rrheurscif Trurzspros'd was to delénd Nonconforrnists against Parliament's attem pts to outlaw Conventicles: Charles' Declaration of lndulgencc in 167 2 olkred him the opponunity to attack Parker's reactionaiy Anglicanisrn while simulraneously appearing to

support the ~ i n g . ~The ' Deciaration failed. but Parker was cffectively siienced by Marvell's polemic. which concluded with the publication of The Second Parr in 1673." Marvell's technique blends a mocking exegesis of Parker's wnling with a pose of witiy and genteel moderation in order to accentuate Parker's extrernisrn. More o k n than not. however. ~Marvcll'starget is not Parker's argument but his style. and his attack frequently okes the f o m of a literary c r i ~ i q u e . ~ Because style revcals chancter. his analysis becomes a rcvelütory mode that unmasks Parker's personality: as Jennifer Chibnall observes. it is "the real man béhind Parker's tcxt" that "Mme11

seeks to uncovcr" (83). Parker is a dangerous Iool who h a s deluded himself as wcll as othcrs: "Never Man ccnainly was so unxquainied with himxlt: And. indced. 'Us pan 01' his discretion avoid his acquaintancc and tell him as iittle of his mind

;is

may be: for he is a dansa-ous fcllow'

67

Marvell's attitude towards the Declaration was ambivalent. and hc x c m s to havc voted against toleration for Papists in Parliament: sce Wallace. Desrir- His Choicr 189-91. Jcnnilèr Chibnall. "Something to the Purpow: Marvell's Rhetorical Suategy in The Rehecirisol Tmnspt-os'd (1672)." P s t 9.2 (1986): 87 t'f. and John Dixon Hunt. And-ew M t i t ~ ~(Ithaca: ll Cornell UP. 1978) 165-67. For Marvcll's religious opinions. see W a m n L. Chernaik. The P o d s Tinte (Cambridge: Cambridge UP. 1983) 129-30 and pussim. and Donal Smith. "Political Bel iefs of Mmell" 55-67. 68

Anthony 3 Wood wrote that Parkcr "laid himself too open to the scvere Strokcs ol'his snearing Adversary" and Judged it more prudent rather to Iay down the Cudgels. than to enter the Lists again" (2: 8 18). Rochester dismisses Parker's charxtcr in "Tunbridge Wells. A Satyr" (1673?) with the remark that "Marvell has enough. expos'd his Folly" (1. 74): Sur Rochester and Parker. sec also Gillian Manning. "Rochesler's Su-t* agoinsr Rrcisun und Mcrnki~tdand Contemporary Religious Debates," SCenr 8 (1993): 1 13. 69

M. C. Bradbrook and M. G . Lloyd Thomas. A d r - C HM:The Second Parr of rhr King h- Cnbinrr Vindicrrredfrom rhr Aspersions of on intporerlr Libeller. Who Contnionl~Culls Hii?t.se& "Mrrci(rzrr.s B~itcrnicrts":Nori Pt-i.soiie~iit the Gtrtr-House. [3] ( 18 August. 1643). MercuN~isAnri-Mercririus, Conunirnicrrting Al/ H~o~lolr~:~. Condirions. Forgeries und L?es of Mylns- Ecrrd Newsmongers. [London. 1 648 1. Met-cvrivs Aidici7s. Cow~runiccctingthe Intrlligencr und Aff(~ire.sof the Court, ru rlir Rrsr uf rhr K i ~ & o r ~ w16 . (25 Junc to 1 July. 1643). Me~rririusBrirtinicws. Co~nnionicrrtingrhe Affiiirrs of Grerrt Briruine: Fur rhr Berrr IInfol-inririon of rhr People. 5 ( 12 September to 19 Septem hcr. 1 643). Me ~ ~ u r i rBrirunicus. rs Communicnting the Affair-rs of Grerit Brirnii~r: For rlir Br rre r Inforr~tntionof the People. 39 ( I O June to 17 June. 1 6 4 ) . Merruriris Brirrtnicrrs. Cotnntunicuting the Affkires of Great Briraine: For the Be rre r Information of the Peuple. 70 ( 10 February io 17 Fe bruary. 16.15). Mercririris Britunicus. Coinmunicctting the Aff(rires of Grerit Britciine: For the Br rtrtInforntution of rhr People. 10 1 ( 13 Octobcr t o 20 October. 1645).

Mercvrivs Vrbmis. Conintrtnicating the Severcil1 Lies. Mistctkes, c d A6sro.tfitir.s of "Brittannicus" cind Others. ro the Abused People. 2 ([9 Novem ber. 16431). [Meston. William]. Phaethon: Or the Firsr Frible of the Second Book of Ovid .Y' Metcrmorphoses Burlesqn 'd. Edinburgh. 1720. [---1. Tlw Knighr. [London]. 1723. Milton, John. Coinplrte Prose Works of John Milton. Gen. Ed. Don M. Wolfe. 8 Vols. New Haven: Yale UP, 1953-82.

---. Cmiplete Poenis o11d Major Prose. Ed. Mcrritt Y . Hughcs. Indianapolis and New York: Bobbs-Memll Company. 1957. A Modrst Vinciimtion of the Ecrr-1of S

v: In ri Lerter to u Friend Concrrning His Bring

Elecled King of Polind. London. i68 I.

"Montelion." Don Jwin L«,nbrrrur Or, A Coinicd Hirrol- of the Lure Times. The Firsr Pcrrt. London. 166 l. ---. Don J~rcritLrimbe~-to:Or. A Comicril Hisror- of the Lnte Times. The Second and Lasr Pwr. London, 166 1. Montereul. Jean de. The Diplomntic Coiwspondence of Jran de Morttel-eu/ critri the Brothers de in England crnd Scorlrinïi, 1645-48. E d . J. G. Bellièvre. French Amb~i.ssïido~-s Fotheringham. 2 Vols. Publications of h c Sçottish History Society 29-31). Edinburgh: Scottish History Society. 1898.

The Most Rumcirkciblr Trinls of Nrithrinirl Tho~npson. Williri~?tPrii~ir.Juhii F i i ~ ~ r dAr l . the Kings- Bench Bru in Guilïf-Hrrll, on the 20th of 7his 6i.striitr Jtrne. i 682. For Trespriss und Misbehcrvioui-S.in Wriring, Prirlring. cind Publiski~tgLrrrrrs. Il~tpo~-riizg. Thur Sir E h u n d Bur- Godjrey Mwthererl Hintself. Alsu S e i e ~ a Sccirit1nlou.s l Refictiuns rrporl the Goiwnnient, and Arruigning the Jusrice of rhe Notion. Wirh Ali the Muterial Circtrmsrrinces rhnr Atmnded TheU Trial, Wherrin Th- Wu-rAil Thrre Forrnd GuiIn. London. [ 16821. MI: Ashrons Ghosr tu hic k t e Conlpcrniun in the Towrr. London. 169 1 . [Mulgrave. John Shct'Licld. Earl of 1. An Essciy upon Poetp. London. 1681.

[Nalson. John]. The Complriinr of Liberty cPc PI-operyagoinst Ar*6itrcrl~Goi~errtntent:Drtlicarrtl tu Al1 Tme English Men, and L.uve1-s of Libei-h. Lnws. cind Religion. London. 168 1.

[Nedham. Marchamont]. The Workd Is T~rr-nedUpside D o w . 70rhe Tiine of "When the King Enioys His Own Agrtin. " [London]. [ 16461.

---.Digitus Dei: O>:Go& Justice upon Trrachety und Trecrson: E.rrntpl$ed in the Life crnd Decrth of the h t e Ja~nesDuke of'Humilton. Being an Ewcr Relurion of his Trairerous Pt-ucrices Sincu the Yeur; 1630. Togrther with n Truc rrnd Fiill Discniw? of the Mjsterie of His Last Engagement for the Destmctiorz of the King. and His Royal/ Pc~srerity. Whereto Is Acided an Epituph. London. 1 639. A New Apparition of S. Ed~nrtnd-br1-yGotifrey 's Ghost tu the E. of D---- in the Toiw*. London. 1681.

A New Song. [London. 16881. Newcastle, Margarct Cavendish, Duchess of- The Life of the Tht-icr Noble, HiJIh a d Pirissant Prince Willimn Caiwtdishe, Duku. Mut-quess, und Euri of Nrrr.ul.stle. London. 1667.

Newcasde. William Cavendish. Duke of. I d r o h p crird Politics oii the E w ofRustormio11: Ne>t.cr~sfle'.s Aeliice to Chorles II. Ed. Thomas P. Slaughtcs. Philadclphia: Ameriçan Philosophical Society. 1984. Newton. John. An Inrt-oclucrion tu the Art of RheroricC Cuntpo.sed for the Ben f i t of Young Scholkirs und Others. Who H m e Not Oppumnity of Being Insr/-irctetiin rhe Lntine Toongire: and Is Vet? Hrlpfrrl tu Unrirrmrntl rhr Figur-miive E-rpr-rssionsil1 the Hui? Sct-iptrrr-es.Arblislted for ci Publick Acliwntugr. London. 167 1 .

[---1.

A S n h r clgoinsr Verrire. London. 1679.

---. The Poeticd CVor-ks of John Oklhml. Ed. Robert Bèll. The Annotated Edition of thc English Poets. London: John W. Parker and Son, 1854.

---. The Porrm Of John Oldham.

Eds. Harold F. Brooks and Raman Scldcn. Oxlosd:

CIarendon. 1985.

Ovid. Ovid's Episrles, Tmnslnteci by Seiw-ol Hciilcls. London. 1 680.

Palmer. Roger. Earl of Castlemaine. A Short c m 1 Trrre Accortnt cfthr Mritri-ici1 Pci.~.sugrsin the Lcrte Wrir Bencwn the English und Dutch. London. 167 1 . A Panegyr-ick on rhe Artthor ofl'Absufoit~ ctnd Achirophrl. " Occrisionrd by his Forntrr WI-itingof un Elegy in PI-uisr of Oliver Cmmwel. Lcrtely Rrprinted. London. 168 1 . A Parrrdox riguinsr Librrqv. Wrirren bu the Lords. During rheir Imprisonrnent in rhr Towel-. A

Pornr. London. 1679. The Parullrl. Or u Coniprrrison benvixt the Prince of DUI-knrss.cind the C h i l h m of Light. the Trrte Prorestunts, rind rhe Futher of Lies. London. 1682.

[Parker. Samuel. Bishop of Oxford]. A Discorrr-sr uj*EcclesicrsriccrlPolirie: LVhelwh the Author-ip of rhr Ciid Magisri-crte oiqrr the Consciences of Subjrcrs in Mrittrrs uf Religion Is Asserted: The Mischiefs cind Inconi~rnirncesof Tolururiun Are Rrpresented und Al1 Prerensrs Plec~ciedin Behulf of Libe I-vof Conscience Are F~tll?Ans~t-er-rd.London. 1670.

---.A Defrncr o~telContinrration of rhr Eccrsiusticcrl Politie:

B? Wm:of Lrrret- to (1 Fricnd in London. Togerlter ivith cr Letret-fiom the Aurhor- of rhr ~ r i e m Debarr. b~ London. 167 1 .

The Purliai?ients Vnspotreri-Birch: In A n s w i- ro Priri ce Roberts Dog Crilled Bu!. And Hic Mdignunr She-Monke-. London. 1 643. Pasyuin tu the Qrteen S Srutue ut Sr. Pcirtl4s.Drrring the PI-ocrssioi~. Jein- 20. 17Z4 [London? 17151.

Peckc. Thomas. Pmwcrssi Puerper-iurtt. Or, Sor~teWell-iïishrs ro Irtgrnrri~.iil rhe Trmslei rion of Six H~tn~lred, of Owen's Epigrcrnu: Mur-ricil (Ir Sprcrocuh. or of Rnriries ro Br Svrrz in Ruine: and the Mosr Select, in Sir Tho. More. To Which Is A ~t~te.rr o Ce~ttrr~? of Heroick Epigi-anis. (Sixh Wherrof Concrm the Twrlir C ~ ~ c r l rilui s ; rhr FUI-tyRemii~ring. Sei*ri-alDeserving Persons. Bi: the Airthor of Thrrt Celebr-uted Elrgir ripou Clrei?rlrtncl. London, 1659. Pepys. Samuel. The Dirr1-r. of Smirtel Pepys. Eds. Robcn Lalham and W illiarn Motthews. 1 1 Vols. London: ~ é land l Hyrnan. 1970-83.

Percival. Thomas. Thr Rye-House Taiwrie: 01; A TI-rreAccoitnt crrtcf Declrrlwrion of the Hu rrid c111dEre cruble ConspiI-ci- ugailut His Mcijesty Kirzg Willier171 nnd the Goiernlnenr. Collrcted Out of the Originril Pupers und Unc-uestionciblrRrcords, Whereby the Whole Narmtion Hris Undeniriblr Clenlness oltd Strengrh. In rr Lrrter tu rlze Lurd Bishop of Roclirstu~;f~-omHis Rigkt Reirrrnd Futhrr in God, DI: Thol?tcisSPI-r~t, Lorhhip S Mosr Hirntble Sel-wnr Tho~nctsPer-ciid. London. 1696.

Phillips. Edward. Thrcrmrrn Poetcit-irnt. or a Cornplecrt Collecriun of the Puers. Especiuliy the Most Eminent. of Al1 Ages. The Antients Distinguishlrf,-ornthe Mo&rn.s in Thrit-SWI-cl1 Alphabets. With S o m Observutiuns und Rejlections upon Mun- of Thr~n.Pm.riculur& Those of Our 0i1.n Nation. Together wirh n Prefatot-y Discorose of the Ports rind Puerr! in Generall. London, 1675, [Philiips. John 1. A Scrqr uguinst Hvpocrites- London. 16%. ---.Muronides or Virgil Travestie: Being a Nrir Puruphrusr rrpun the Fifrh Book ~f Virgils Kneids in B~1rlesqueVerse. London. 1 672.

---. Mcrroniilrs or Virgil I r r a w s ~ Being . ri New Porr1ph1-cisrrtpon rhe Sixth Book cf Viqils Enrids in Burlesque Verse. London. 1673.

[--1.

A Reflection on Oirr Moclern Porrp. An ESSU-. London, 16%

"Philopatris." A Sacrick Porm againsr Thosr Mercenrit- Wtwches. und Troubler-sof Englunds Trunquilin., the Aurhors of Herociitus rind Observuro,: Infrntorrs for Theit-Scribling rhroicghour Englmd. London. 1682. A Pinduripe Ode. Drscribing the ErcelIen cy of T I - ~ Virtue. w with Rejle..riu~i.son rlrr S m y ogcrinst Vit-rue. London. 1679.

Plautus. Plcrutus's Coi~tedie.~, Antphitpon. Epirlicics. rrnd Rudrrw. M ~English: J With Criricd Rei?~ulg upon Ectch Plci!. Trans. Laurençe Echard. London. 1693. Playford. Henry. The Second Purt of Miisick 's Hund-Muid: Conruining the Newrst Lessons. Grounrlr. Srarribcmis. Minrters. and liggs. Srr for- rhu VitgimiLs. Hnrpsichord, und Spinet. London. 1689. A Plecrsrrnr Confrrencr rrpon "Thr Obsrnwto,; " crnd "Hrrciclirits":Togrrhrt- wirh (r BI-irf ReIurio~tof the Present Posaire of rhe French Afftiirs. London. 168'.

A Puent. In Drfrnce of thr Church of Englrind: hi Opposition ru rhr Himl rrnd Pcinthur London. 1688. The Puer Banter il: Or, Ovid in a Vizo,: A Burlesqi:Achitophel Trrrnsprosil. A Puent. London. 1682.

[Shadwell. Thomas 1. The Sdlen L o i v , ~ :01:The Intprrri~~rrit.~. A Cotnerly Acreci Highncss rhr Duke of YUI-kesSenwnrs. London. 1668.

His

---. The Merlrrl of Johti Bqrs: A S l t ~ cigninsr r Full! rind Knrii-et?. London. 1683.

---. Some Reflrcrions upon h r Pwrended Prr~iildin the Pici! C d i d "The Dirke of Girisr. " in ri Letrur ro [i Friund. London. 1683. ---.Coniplere WOI-ks.Ed. Montague Summers. 5 Vols. London: Fortune P. 1927.

Shaftesbury. Anthony Ashley Cooper, 3rd Earl of. Charncrerisricks of Men. Mci~inrrs,Opinioiis. Tinrrs. 2nd cd. London. 17 14.

---. Cha~ncreristicsof Men, Mcrnners. 0pi1lion.s. Times, E r c ~By the Riglu Honorrrubie Anrhony Eurl of Shuftrsbui-. 1900. Ed. John M. Robertson- 2 Vols. Glouccstcr. MA: Peter Smith, 1963. [Shaw. Samuel]. Wor-clsMcide Visible. 1679. Ed. R. C. Alston. English Linguistics 1500- 1800 3 t 7. Menston: Scolar P, 1972.

[Sheils, Robert]. The Liws of the Poers of Gwrrt Brituin und Irukrnd, To the Tinre of Dean SwifrCompilerifrorn Ample Matericils Scutrered in cr Vm-irtyof Books. and Especici& from the MS. Nores of rhe Lare Ingrnious MI-. Coxeter cind Orbel-.S.Collected for This Design. By Mr. Cibber-. 5 VOIS. London. 1753. [Shippen, William]. Murlerution Displayil. A Porni . . . . 8~rhr Swnr Aiirhor. Now Fï>i>-r Correctly Publishrd, crnd the Addirion of Sevtml Chn~ncte~-s Onlirtetl in Former Editions. 2nd ed. London. 1705. Sidney. Sir Philip. Miscrlluncorts Prose of Sir Philip Sidney. Eds. Kathennc Duncan-Joncs and Jan Van Dorstm. Oxford: Clarendon, 1973. A Sight of y TI-crns-crctionsof Thrsr h t t e r Yecires Emblrntized it-irli Engrcruing Plats Which Men Mqv Reari icith ont Specraclrs. London. 1643. Sir Ed~nrtndbrci?Go[&-r-S Appco-irion tu Nor. Thoinpson. London. [ 1 683?].

Sir Ehtrrnrlbrt~~ Godfk- Ghost 01: An Answr ro Nm. Thoc~ipsonsSc~intlnlortsLetter fi-ont Combrirfge,to Mr. Miles Prunce. in Relttiun ru rhe M d r r of Sir Etlntirnclb~tr-Goc@y. 2nd ed. London. 1682.

Smith.John. Myste~?of Rhetoric Unveild 1657. Ed. R. C. Alston. English Linguistics 15(U 1800 205. Menston: Scolar P. 1961). [Speed, John]. Bort itpon Butt. A Poe111upon the Pcrrts, Patience. mtl Pciins. of Bcrrtlt. Kenipster, Cler-k. Poet. Cutler, of Holy-Roorl-Pcri-i.sl~in Southrinipton. @ cr Persu~iof Qurtli. To Which is Annr.re:l rlir Vision, Wltrrrin is Drso-ibrd Btr rrY.' Pe~:von( r d Ingrnuie. Wirh cm Accortnt of the Prrsrnr Stcite rrnd Glo~?.of Soittlranzpron. London. 1680. S[peed], R[obert]. The Cmtrtter Scr@%. Wher.eurtru Is Atldud Tlie Coüntrr Rar. London. 1648.

Spence. Joseph. Obse~wrions,Anechres, crnd Cltcircrcre1-.sof Books aitd Meit Collectrd f i m i Coniw.sutiort. Ed. James. M . Osborn. 3 Vols. Oxford: Clarendon. 1966.

Spencer. John. A Discortrse Concrrning Prodigies: Wherrin the V u r t i ~of PI-tscrges T h m is Repl-ehenrlrd uncf theil- Trzte c d Proprr Ends Assertrd crnd Vindiccrrrtl. Cambrid gc. 1663.

Spender. Dalc. The Dimy of Elizaberh Pepus. London: Gralion. 199 1. Spenser. Edrnund. The Yale Editiort of rhe Sholwr Poenis of E h ~ u n dSpenser. Eds. William A. Oram et al. New Haven and London: Yak UP. 1989.

Spingarn, Joel Elias. ed. Criticri1 Essciys of the Seiwtrrnrh Centrip. 3 Vols. Oxlimi: Clarendon. 1909.

Sprat. Thomas, Bishop of Rochester. Obsen~rrtionson Monsierrr de Sorbier's Voyige inro Englortd Writren ro DI-.Wren. P~*ofrssor of A.strotto~nyin O.rfuril. London. 1665.

---.The Histoy of the Royd Socie'?; of London for the Irnproii~ogof Nciturcrl Knoideclge. London, 1667.

[---1. A True Account m t l Declrircition of the Horrirf Cunspirriq ugainsts the h t r Kig, His Prrsent M ~ ~ e srrnd n . the G o v e ~ n ~ n e nAs c It Wrrs Order il tu Be Published by His Lire ~ u j ~ s i oy on . don. 1685.

---. n i e Bishop ofRochesrer's Second Lertrr to the Right Hunuunible the Eerrl of Dorset crnd Middlesex. Lord-Cliamberitin of His Majesty 's Hur(shokl. London. 1689. Stephen Colledge S Ghosr to the Fcinuricd Cubai. [London], 168 1 . [Stevenson. Matthew 1. Th r Wirs Parciph rcis il: 01:P o ~ ~ inise p h icpon Pnrcrphrcisu. In cr Burlesqr(e on the Sewrrrl Lnte Tronslcitiom of Oiids Episrles. London. 1680.

The Strringr cind Wunrleiful Appcrririon: O,; The Adiicr of Colleclgr S Ghosr ro the New Plotrrrs. London, 1683.

Srronge Neiisfr.ont Neirgrrte: Oc A Relnrio/o How rhr Ghost cf Collrdg~rhr PI-orrsrcritt-Joyttei; Appeciwd tu Horie the Juywr Since His Condeninntion: B e i q (in Accorcrir of rhe Whule Discorr~wThar Pust Brnr-een Thent. [London]. 1683. A Summonsfro~~t n True-Protesrrint Coiijrrr-er: tu Gthegrrs's Ghost. to Appecrr Supremli 19. 1682. London. L682, Swift. Jonathan. A Trile of a TL&. To Which 1s Added "The Brrrrle of the Bouks" cind the "Mechmicctl Operation of the Spirir" . . . Together wirh "The Histo>l:of Mrirtin," Wooton S Obsrrvutions upon the "Taie of a Tub." CurllS "Contplete Key." etc. 1704. Eds, A. C. Guthkelch and D. Nichol Smith. 2nd cd. Oxford: Clarendon, 1958.

---. The Prose Works of Joricirhnn Swift. Ed. Herbert Davis. 14 Vols. Oxlerd: Clarendon. 1937-68.

[Taylor, John]. A Sliiiliiig: 0 1 ; The Tmuoiles of Twlrte-Pence. [LondonJ.[ 162 1 1.

---.The Complirinr of Ch~'i~sr~nr~s. And rhe Twrrs of Twerferyie. London. 163 1 .

---.Bull. Berm. crnd Horse, Crrt. Gr/-triilr.r d Lu~tgtirile. Wirh T~rles.m d Tirles ($Biils,

Clenches. und Flr~shes.Also Here cind Thew (1 Tuuch of Otrr Berri-r-Garden-Sport: with rhe Second Parr ofthe Meriy Concrirs of Wir und Mirth. Togethri- witli the Ncimes ofAl1 the Btrlls and Berrrus. London. 1638. ---.A Most Horrible. Terrible, Tollerub/e, Termcrgunr Sn-r-e.

[London1. [ 16391.

---.Differing Worships, ut; the Oddes. brnwene Soinu Knights Service irnd God's. Or Toin Nushe His Ghost. (the Old Murrin Qrteller)Neiify Ror~siI.and Is Coinr to Chi& and Tuke Orrlrr with Nonconformists. Schisi?icrtiqrres.Sepcrrnrisrs. cind Scrinci~hiisLibrllrrs. Wherein Their Ablisive Opinions A ru Mrin fisrrd Tl~eir. Jeer-es MilciI~Rrroiwtl, und Their Unincrnner-(vMmners Adnonished London. 1640.

[---1. The Woinens Shcirpe Revenge: Or un Ansiver to Sir Selrionze Sobel- thlrt Writ Those Railing Pamphlets Culleri "The Juniper and Crabwee Lectrors, " â c . Being rr Sorrnd Rrpiy and A Full Confrtorion of those Bookes: With un Apology in rhis Cuse for the Defencr of Us Woinen. Pe~formrdby Mm? T«ttle-Weil. rrnd lorrne Hir-Hini-Ho~?ir. Spinstrrs. London. 1640. [---]. The Hellish Pnrlirri?rent. Bcing cr Corinter-P(irlirr111~11r to This in Etiglriiul, Cuntciinit1g ihr

Drinonst~-rrtiwSpeeches and Stritrrrrs of Thru Currrr. Togtvher wirh the Petfect Lrrisw Made benwen the Tico Hellish Frrctiuns the Pripi.srs crnd rhr Bi-oisnists. [LondonJ.164 1 . ---. A Si*iwrr,.me of Sect«ries, critri Schisrnutiqrtes: Whrrein I s Discoi.eretl rhr Strriitgr Pwriching

(or-Pmring) of Srrch rrs Are by Their Trurles Coblers, Tinkur-S.Petllers, Wtw\vrs, Sowgel~fers.nnd Clymey-Sii~eprrs.[London1. 164 1.

---.A Deliccrre. Driinn, Driimnblr Diulogrre. beni-ertt the Driill cirid cr Jesirite. London. 1632. ---. M

d Fmhions, Orl F(rshions. Al1 Oitr of Fmhions. or. The Ei~rD1ei11.s of niesr Disn-crcretl Times. London, 1642.

---. The GrnertdI Coniploi~irof the Mosr Opprrssed, D i s n - e s d Coi~tt?wns of Englcrt~tf.

Conrploining ru, crnd Crying Olit upoit the nrctnny of the Perprtucill Prrrlirimunt rit Westnlinste,: Writren by One Thar L o w s , Serves, rind Hoitours the King, onci Also H01d.s rlzr Dipi? of rr Peirlirn~zent.in Due Honorrrrible Regard cind Rewwnce. { Oxford. 16451.

---. O?rfoi-clBrsiectged, Surpi-ised Taken, rrnd Pitrifrr& Ennecl ort Mirndr~yrhr Second of Iirne Lasr, 1645. bu the Vuliant Forces of rhe Luidon ond Wesnninsrrr P~rrlicrment. Written, bv rr True Wellwisher of Theirs, Who Sterlfrist!\: Hopes. rintl Herrrtily Pr.(rys. Th- Mo\: ~ r r i the r Likr P~*osperorrs Srrccesse in Al1 Thrir Firtuw Unriertrikings. [Oxford 1. 1 645.

[---1. The World Turnil Upside Doivn: O,; A Briefe Description of the Ridicitlui~.~ fris hi on.^ of These Distrncted Tinvs. By T. J. ri Well-Wler tu King. Parliament und Kingrio~~i. London, 1647.

Temple, Sir William. Obsrriwions upon the United Provinces of the Nethe>-lm& London. 1673. ---.Miscellrinrci. The Second Part. In Furir Essciys. 2nd ed. London. 1690.

---.An Introclucrion tu the Histury of England. London. 16%. ---. The Wor-ksof Sir Wi(licittt Temple. But-t. III TIL-oYulcinrrs . . . Tu Which is Prrfiril Somr Accoiint of the Life riml Writings of tlrr Arrthor. 2 Vols. London. l 7 X . Thompson. Edward Maunde. ed. Cunrsponcfence of rhe Frirnilv of Hcrtron. Beiltg C h i e n Letters Adch-essecl tu Christopher First Viscount Hmron. A.D. lfi»l-1704. Carnden Society N.S. 22 and 23. 2 Vols. London: Carndcn Society. 1878. [Thompson. Nathaniel?]. A Lerter Wt-irtenft-uni O.rfo~-dB! Mt-. Srephen Colledge. London. 168 1, Tillotson. John. Aschbishop ol'Canterbury. The Wurks ufrhe Most Reiwr~tdDI-. John Tillor.~on. Lute A ~ h b i s h o pof Cnnferbru?: Conrciimhg F i f n Four- Srnnons unri Disco~rrsrs.on Sei~erulOccusions. Tagrthri- with rhe R d r of Fuith. Being Al1 Thar Wrt-r Atblished &v His Grcice Hinurlf: And Now Collrcred imo One Vollime. Tu Which I s Adrled ciil Nphribrriccil Tctblr of the Principul Mcirtet-S. London. 1696.

Tipper. Elizabeth. The PilgrimY.' Viaticcon: 01:The Drsrirute. but Nor For-lotn. Beirlg A Diiinr Poeni. Digrstedfioni Medir-v Grnerd ugoinsr Thenr. for Wriring. Printing und P~tblishingLibels. bu Wrry of Lerrers rind Other Pt-inrs. Rrfle ctilig ripon h e Jrisricr of rhr Nation, in the Prucerdings ugainst the Murderrrs of Sir Erl~~uinri-Bir?Gor!frq. Ar Guild-Hrrll on Tuesrluy Jrrne the 70th. 1682. Whrw rrfrer rr Frrll Heciring The! Wrl-e Convicted Together ivith un Acconlpt of Sei7errrk AfJirivits Recrcl in His Mrijesties Cu~o-t of f i t g s Bench rind Other Mrrttrcî ut the Tinle of Theit-Receivi~~g Sentence. To Which 1s Adderi by Wqv of Appendix, Seipercil Othe r AfJiduvics Which F Lrther ~ Corifirn~the Testimon! of Mr. Prancr, Given upon the T l y l of Green. Berry rind Hill rrburrr Thrit Mu,.dr,; wirh Sotne Obse~vationsTolrching the Suid Thoinpson. FUI-u-el1 crnd Priin. London. 1682. Tutchin. John. AII Hel-oick P o m rrpon the Latr hrprdirion of Hiy Mrrjesh. tu Resclte Englcinrl front Popel?:. Tinrnny. und Arbitrc1,- Goiwnmenr. London. 1 689.

---.A Poe111ripuil Thrir Mrijesries Speeches tu the Nonconfori?iisrMiriistrr-.S. [London. 1 6904!]. ---. Ref7rcriun.s ripon the French Kings Declurution. Foi the Rrstcirrr-ution of rhr Lmr King Jui~ws.to rhe Kingdom of England. London. 1690.

---.A Conglntiilrro~~ Pueni to rhr Rrivrenrl DI: Johri Tillotson. iipun his Pt*u~~rorio~t tu the AI-ch-Episcopril-See of Cunterbiii-. London, 169 1. [ ---1.

The Tribe of Le i

i

A Poeni. London. 169 1.

---. Selectcd Poeins. Intro. Spiro Peterson. Augustün Reprint Society 1 10. Los Angeles: U of Cidiforniri P. 1964.

The Q&ur-n-Ghost: Ot-. The Strrrnge Downfull of the Grillo~vs.A Most Tnte Relutiutt Huw. rhr

Friinorrs Triple- TI^ Nrer Pridcii~~gton Wus on Tursricry-nighr Lmt (rhr Thil-dof this Instont Septelnbrr) Wonrferfilly Pllickt up b! the Ruors. und Dcl~zolishrtjv C e m i n EiilSpirits. To Which Is Alilird Sqriire Kerch's Lamentririon for rhr b s s of his Shop. &c. London. 1678. Tvburn S Groans: Or, An Hire & Ci? After a Polish Rrnrgcidu. [London. 16821.

Upon His Maiestirs Cornniing to Hoin?@. [London 1. [ 16471. (Irania's Temple: O,; A S n r y upon rhe Silent-Ports. London. 16%.

Vaughan. Henry. The Pouri? cind Srlecrrd Prosr of Hent? Vmrghrrn. Ed. L. C. Martin. London: Oxrord UP. 1963.

[Vdlemonc, Pieire Le Lorrain. Abbe de]. D~rçtur-Hisror-icus: Or. A Short S-vsrrin of U~ziiw.sal Hisrop. c i i d Ait Introduction ro rhe Stuc- of Ir. Ed. Thomas Hearnc. 2nd ed. 2 Vols. London. 1705. A Vindicririon of CheripsicfeCrosse oguitur the Rounrlhrcids. Oxford. 1643. ViqiI. Vit-gil'sBi~colicksEnglishetl. Wherriinro is A t l d d the Trctnslnriuiun of rhe Two F i m S r r ~ r sof Irii?enrrl. Trans. John Biddlc. London. 1634.

Voiture. Vincent de. The Second Vul~ttneof the Wot-k.s of Moitsirur Voitut-r.Coitruiiii~igHis Foiniliw Lrtrrrs ru Grntlrmrn crncf Lufies. M d r English by J. Swil. E k - : Mi*.Denris. Tho. S q l w o r , Esq; M i Atkins. Ccipr. Bat-ki; und MI: Tho. BI-OWI.To Wfiich i.s AtIrlcd A Pncqurr f , o n ~WiilS: Or. A New Cullrctiolt of 01*igiiicrlLurrr r s on Sr i.el~rlSubjrcrs. 2nd cd. London, 1705. Walker. Ohadiah. Sotw /risrructioiis Concerning the Arr of O,-crrop. Collecred for rhr use of ci Fritml rr Yortng Stlrclenr. London. 1659.

---. O f E~l~rccrrio~t. 1673. Ed. R. C. Alston. English Linguistics 1500- 1800 329. Mcnston: Scolai. P. 1970. Waller. Edmund. On the Park crr Sr. Jm~eses.[London. 166 1 1.

---. The Second Pro-r of MI: Waller's Portm. Col~rriilring.His Alter-uriurt uf the "Mnicis Trcigrdy"Anrf Whateivr of His 1s Yet UIIPI-interl:Togerhel-ititlt Sunie Orhrr Puerlis. Speeches. &c rhur Were Printed Sei~elnlly.und Nuwl- Put inro the Firsr Collection of His Poenu. London. 1690.

Warcup. Edmund. "The Joumals o l Edmund Warcup. 1676-84." Eds. Kcith Fciling and F. R. D. Ncedharn. EHR 1 1 (1925): 235-60. Warton, Joseph. An Essuy on the Geriirrs und Wrirings of Pope. 2 Vols. London. 1756-82Watson. William]. A Decricordon of Ten Qiodlibeticrilk Qvestions Cuncerning Religion cind

Stcite. Wherein the Author Froming Hinrselfn Quilibet tu Ertet- Quodlibrr, Decides crn Hunrfred Crosse Inrerrogatorie Doubrs. A borr t th r Genet-dl Conremions brnrirr rhc Seininririe Ptiesrs crnrl lesirirs. [ Douay'!1, 1602.

Werenfels. Samuel. A Discourse of Lugonicichy. 01.Conn-oi~erqs crbultr Wu)-- of Cor~.science,Mm-ch 15, 1672. London. 1672. Winsmlcy. William. The Liiw of the Most Fcrmoiïs Englislt Pouru. 1687. I n m d . Wi Il iam Riley Parker. Gainesville: Scholars' Fxsimiles and Repnns. 1963. Wither. Gcorge. Abrrses Stript, und Whipr. Ut-Sertit-icd Essuys. Bv Grorgr Withri: Dinidrd inro Two Bookes. London. 1613.

---. Haleki~iuh. Or, Brituns Second Renirrtibrcincer. Br-inging ro Rrmbrcincr (in Ptuisefrtll m d Pœ~rirenricil Hynns. Spiritual1 Songs. (inri M o r d - Orles) Mudirorioits. A diart cing the Glu of Gud, in the Prcrctisr of Pietie crnd Vertw: rrnd Applyrd ru Eosir Trritrs. ro Be Sung in Fmrilies, &c. London, 1641.

---.Campo-Mus~e,or The Field-Mrrsings of Cliptuin George VVirliet; Torrchirtg His Mi1itcrt;v rhe J~c.vnirssrofrhr Scrnzr. cirit/ rhr Pi-rsnrr hgcigei~ientfor the King crnn [sicl Pot-licriw~tr. Disrr-ctctions of These Isli-incfs. London. 1 643.

[---1. The Great Assises Holden in Par*na.rsris by Apollo and His A.s.sr.ssoocr: At Whiclz Sessions cire Arraigned. London. 1645.

[---1. Prosopopœia Brirannica: Brircins Genius. or. Good-Angel. Personarrrf: Rvosuning and Advising, Touching the Gumes No»- Pfaying. cind the Adventures NON-cir Hrizurcl in These Islunris: und Pwsuging, Also, Some Furure Things, Not I/rrliX-ehro Corne ro Puss. Disco vered, by Terrie-Filius (ci Well-Knowne Loiver o f rhe Piiblicku-Peucu) Whrn rlie Begrrtiilg u f n Nuriunall-Quurrell W m Firsr Ferrwd London. 1618.

---.British Appectls. ,rith Godi Mercifull Replies. on rhe Behulfr of the Co/~tniori-,i.ri-Mut-irll. Cam bridge: Cambridge UP. 1983.

---. Sexrrcd Freedont in Restoro tion Litrrritur-e. Cam bridge: Cambridge UP. L 995. Chibnall, Jennifer. "Somelhing to the Purpose: Marvcll's Rhetorical Suaiegy in Thr Rrheïrcscil Transpros'd( l672)." PSr 9.2 ( 1986): 80- 104. Clark. A. F. B. Boiieoic cind the French Clrrssicd Critics in Englmcl( I660- I8.30). Paris: Champion. 1925. Clark. John R. "Introduction" Thdicl 5 ( 1983): 3-4.

---. "Chafing Dish: Satire's Adulteration of Laquage and Stylc." Thdici 5 ( 1983): 11-26. Clark. Sandn. The Elizabethan P mnphlrtrers: Pupitlrit- Mu rdistic Pot~iphlets lS8O- 1640. London: Athlone P. 1983. Clarke. M. L. The Noblesr Romm: M m x s Brcttcts ctndHis Reputution. Gcn. Ed. H. H. Scullard. Apccts of Greck and Roman Lik. London: Tharncs and Hudson. 198 1. Clayborough. Arthur. The G>vtesqire in E~tglishLirrt-citure. 1965. Oxford: Clarendon. 1967.

Clifford. James L. "The Eighteenth Century." MLQ 26 ( 1965): 1 1 1-34.

.

Clingharn, G. J. "Johnson's Use of Oldham in His Version of Horace Odes IV. VIL" N&Q N.S. 32 ( 1985): 242-43. Clinton-Baddelcy. V. C. The Blolrsqur Tt-riditionin the Euglish Thrcirre crfret- !660. London: Methuen, 1952. Clyde. William M. "Parliament and the Press. 1643-7." L i h p . 4th Ses. 13 ( 1933): 399-424.

--- . "Parliment and the Press. II." Libmr-!. 4th Ser. 14 ( 1934): 39-58. Cofky, Michael. Roman Sarire. London: Methuen; New York: Barnes and Noble, 1976. Cogswell. Thomas. "The Politics of Propaganda: Charles 1 and thc People." JBS 29 ( 1990): 187-2 15.

Cohen, Murray. Sensible Wor& Ling~risricPt-cictice in Engirind, IWO- 1785. Baltimore: JOhn Hopkins UP. 1977. Cohen. Ralph. "The Augustan Mode in English Pmtry." ECS 1 ( 1967): 3-37.

---- "Innovation and Variation: Literary Change and Georgic Poetry." Litet-crrwe crnd Hisror?: Pupet-s Read or u Clut-kLibruy Sernina,: Mnt-ch 3, 1973. Ed. Richard Lchan. Los Angeles: William Andrews Clark Mernoriai Li brary. 1974. 1 -32. Coleman. Antony. and Antony Hammond. eds. Pom? ( i d Drciinci 1570-1700: Essu~si11 Honorir uf Huroid F. Brooks. London and Ncw York: Methuen. 198 1.

Colton. Robert E. Juiwwl crnd Buîleun. Studicn zur Vergleichenden Literatuwiss 1. Olms: Hildesheim. 1987. Colville. K. N. "Dialogues of the Dcad." QR 267 ( 1936): 308-20. Combe. Kirk. "Dryden's Allusion to Horace in Mrtc Fircknuu." N&Q N.S. 34 ( 1987): 330-3 1.

---. "Clandestine Protcst against William III in Dryden's Translations of Juvcnal and Pcrsius." MP 87 ( 1989): 36-50. --- . "'But Loads ol'Sh------ Almost Choked the Way': Shadwcll. Drydcn. Rochcstcr. and ~ h c Surnmcr of 1676." TSLL 37 (1995): 126-64.

Condren. Conal. and A. D. Cousins. The P o l i t i d irlenrin of Andtwr M u t ~ d l .Aldcrshot: Scolar P. 1990. Conlon. Miçhacl J. "Thc Rhetoric of Kairos in Dryden's Absulonz crrttl Achiruphrl" Rhetorics of Ortler / Orclet-ing Rheror.ics in English Neuclmsical Liret-un(/-r.Eds. J. Douglas Cantield and J. Paul Huntcr. Newark: U of Delaware P; London and Toronto: Associated UP. 1989. 85-97.

Connery.Brian A.. and Kirk Corn be. eds. Thheorizing Sirrit-r: Ess(~ysi/t L i t r t - m ~Ci-iricisur. New York: St. Mutin's P. 1995.

Cook. Ro ben. "Charles Cotton: Scarron Travcsticd." Schol~isricrllidwifrt?:. Srdien z~rni Sutirischen in der Englischrn Liurutro IrSOO- I8OO. Eds. Jan Eden Pcters and Thomas Michael Stein. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. 1989. 67-84. Coolidge. John S. "Martin Marprelate. Marvell. and Drcorurn Pet-soncrr as a Scitirical Themc." PMLA 74 ( 1959): 526-32,

--- . "Marvell and Horace-" MP 63 ( 1965): 1 1 1-20. Cope. Kevin L. "The Infinite Perirneter: Hurnan Nature and Ethical Mcdiation in Six Rcstorahn Writcrs." Resrorutiot~5 ( 198 1): 58-75.

--- . "The Conqucst of Truth: Wycherley. Roçhcstcr. Butler. and Diydcn and thc Rcstorarion Critique of Satire." Resroratioil 10 ( 1 Y 86): 19-40. Corman. Brian. G e n w cind Cene,-ic Chcrnge in English Conrrcl\: 1660-1710. Toronto. Buffalo. and London: IJ O S Toronto P. 1994.

Corns. Thomas N . Unc/oisrei-ed Virrue: English Pofiricril Litet-cir~rrp.1 6 4 -1660. Oxford: Clarendon. 1992. Corse. Taylor. " Festinri Lente: Dryden and Oldham." Rrrrorcirioil 1 3 ( 1 989 ): 1 7-75.

---. Di?den's 'Xrnrici": n e Englisli V i q i l . Newark: U of Delaware P. 199 1 .

---.

"An Echo O S Virgil in Abscrlunl and Achiruphel." N&Q N.S. 4 0 ( i993):3 18- 19.

---. "An Allusion to Horace in Abscilor?~riilif Achituphrl." N&Q N . S . -10 ( 1993 1: 3 19-7 1.

---. "Roman Skies in Thrrnodi~iaAugitsrrrlis." N&Q N . S . JO ( 1993): 37 1. Conirn, Robert T.. Jr. "Paris as Barrier: Boileau's Sclrir-u VI." PFSCL 9 ( W 8 2 ): 627-39. CotteriIl. Anne. "The Poli tics and Acslhetics of Digression: Drydcn's Discotrisr Coizcei.izii~grhe Original and PI-ogwssof Sririt-e." SP 9 1 ( 1994): 44-95. Cousins, A. D. "The Cavalier World and John Cleveland." SP 78 ( 198 1 ): 6 1-86.

---. "The Idea ot' a 'Resioration' and the Verse Satires of Butler and Ma~vcll." SoR 14 ( 198 1): 13 1-42.

---. "Oldham in Dekncc of the Restoration: Sciriws r ~ p mrhe Justrit.~." NM 87 ( 1986): 144-5 1.

Cnig. Hardin. "Dryden's Lucian." CP 16 ( 192 1): 14 1-63.

-

Crane. R. S. "Anglican Apologetics and the Idea of Progress. 1699- I7-W LW3 1 ( 1934): 273306. 349-82.

---. The Lrrnguugrs of

Criricisin und the Srnrlui~'s "Mmy7ecknou." Lirbana: U of Illinois P. 1926. Dixon. Pcter. The World of Pope's Satires: An Inn-odrrcrion t o rhr "Epi.st1r.s"cind "hirarioil.~ of Horwe. " London: Methuen. 1968.

---. Rhetoric. 197 1 . Critical Idiom 19. London and New York: ~Methuen.1984. Do bbins. Austin C. " Dryden's Character of a Good Parson': Background and Intcrpretation." SP 53 ( 1956): 5 1-59. Dobranski. Stephen B. '"Where Mcn of Dil'kring Judgemcnts Croud': Milton and the Culture ol' the Cofke Houses." SCent 9 ( 1904):35-56.

Doelman. James. "George Wither. the Stationcrs Company and the English Psaltcr." SP 90 ( 1993): 74-82. Donaldson. Ian. "Jonson and Anger." YES 14 ( 1984): 56-7 1.

---. "Fathers and Sons: Jonson. Dryden. and Mnc Flrckrior." SoR 18 (1985): 3 14-37.

Donneily. Jerome. "Movement and Meaning in Dryden's ~MrrcFlecknoe."TSLL 12 ( 197 1): 56982.

---. "Fathers and Sons: The Normative Basis of Dryden's Absulum und Achitophel." PLL 17 ( 198 1 ):

363-80.

---. "John Dryden and the Failure of Political Categoncs." SVEC 305 ( 1993): 1392-94. Doody, Maqaret Anne. The During Muse: Arrglistun P o r t q Recunsidered. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. 1985. Downie. James Alan. Tu Sertle the Succession of the Store. Liremrrîrr and Poliricr. 1678-1750. New York: St. bfartin's P. 1994. Dudley. D. R. "The Satiric Element in Lucretius." Lut-erirîs. Ed. D. R. Dudley. London: Roudedgc and Kegan Paul. 1965. 1 15-30-

Duff. John Wight. Rotmit Snrirr: frs O ~ l o o on k Socid Lifr. Bcrkelcy: U dCalifomia P. 1936. Duffy. Helen. and Paul S. Wilson. "A Nok on John Cleveland's T o Mistress K. T." N&Q N.S. 22 ( 1975): 546-48.

---..and Paul S. Wilson.

"Two Manuscripls of John Cleveland." iV&Q N.S. 32 ( 1985): 162-66.

Duffy. Maureen. Heirq. PLU-wll.London: Fourth Estaie Ltd.. 1994. Dundas, Judith. " Advice- to-a- Painter Pocms: Horizons o t' a Genre." Word m t i Visrrcrl Imugincrrion: Srridies in the It~te~-action of En~lishLirerotrire crnd Visucri A m . Eds. Karl Josef Holtgen, Pewr LM.D d y . and Wolfgang Lottes. Erlangen: UnivcrsitZtsbibliothek Erlangen-Nürnherg. 1988. 133-45. Dust. Alvin 1. "The Derby MS. Book of Cotton's Poems and 'Contenta~ion'Re-Considered." SB 37 ( 1984): 170-80. Eagleton. Teny. Litrrur? 771eo1y:AI? introduction. 1983. Oxford: B u i l Blackwell. 1986. Edgecombe. Rodney Stenning "Marvell.Cromwell. and Spartacus." N&Q N.S. 30 (237): 36-37. Edmond. Mary. Rare Sir Willium Daiwtunt: Port Lcrureute. Pkpïright. Civil Wu, Grnrrril. Restorurion ntratre Manager. Revels Plays Corn panion Li brary . Manchester: Manchester UP, 1986.

Edwards. Michacl. "A Meaning for Mock-Heroic." YES 15 ( 1985): 48-63. Edwards. Thomas R. Imagination and Pmïrr: A Study uf Purrn on Public Themes. London. Chatto and Windus. 197 1.

Egan. James. "Milton and the Marprelate Tradition." MiltonS 8 ( 1975 ): 103-2 1.

Ehrenpreis. Irvin. "Swift's History of England." JEGP 5 1 ( 1952): 177-85. ---.Swif: The Mun. His Works. und the Agr. 3 Vols. London: Methuen. 1962-83.

Eleanor, Mothér Mary. "AnneKilligwrr. and Mac Flechoe." P Q 43 ( 1964):47-54.

Eliaç. Richard. "'Bayes' in Buckingham's The Rrherrrscil." ELN 15.3 (1978): 178-8 1. ---. "Political Satire in Soclom." SEL 18 ( 1978): 423-38. Eliot. T. S. The Sucreri Wood: Esscip- or1 Puer/? und CI-iticism. 1930. London: iMethucn. 1972. Elkin. Paul V . The Atrpstun Defence of Smir-e. Oxford: Clarendon. 1973.

Elledge. Scott. "The Background and Development in English Crîticisrn o l thc Thcorics of Generality and Particdari ty." P U 62 ( 1947): 117-82. Elliott, Robert C. "The Satirist and Society." ELH 2 1 ( 1954): 237-48.

---. The Po>ro-of Srrtit-r: Mllgic. Riruul. Au. Princeton: Princeton UP. l%( ). ---. The Lirerci)? Personrz. Chicago and London: U of Chicago P. 1982. Ellis, Amanda M. "Horace's Intluence on Dryden." PQ 4 ( 1925): 39-60.

Ellis, Frank H. "'Legends No Histones' Part the Second: The Ending of Absulom cind Achirophel." MP 85 ( 1988):393-407. Erskine-Hill. Howard. "Rochester: Augustm or Explorcr'?" Renai.ssciit cr ctntl Modern Essuys: Prescnted tu Viiinn de Solli Pinto in Crlrbrntion of his Sr iwirierh Bit*rhdq. Ed. G . R. Hibbard. London: Routledge and Kegm Paul. 1966. 5 1 -64.

---. "Scholarship as Hurnanism." EC 29 ( 1970): 33-52.

---.

"Augustans on Augustanisrn: England. 1655- 1759." Of Pr-ii?i~re Vices ci11d Pirblick Bel~rfirs. Beitriige zur Englischen Litcratur dcs Frühcn 18. lahrhunderts. Ed. Johann N. Schmidt. Frmktùi-t am Main, Bern. and Las Vegas: Peter Lang. 1979. 7-34.

---. The Aligrrstm I&o in English Literririrre. London: Edward Arnold. 1983. Evans, G. Blakemore. "Dryden's Absdont and Achirophrl and Plutarch's Antony." N&Q N.S. 34 (1987): 331, Ewald, William Bragg. Jr. The Musks of Joncithrin SwijL Oxford: Basil Blückwell. 1954 Ezell. Margaret J. M. "Reading Pseudonyms in Sevcntccnth-Ccntury English Cotetic Lirerature." EL 2 1 ( 1994): 14-25. Fabricant. Carolc. "Rochester's World of Imperfeçt Enjoyment." JEGP 73 ( 1074): 338-50.

----

"nie Writer as Hero and Whore: Rochester's LerrrrJ-om Arremiric~ru Chloe." EL 3 (1976): 152-66.

Farley-Hills. David. The Beneidence of hirghter: Contic Poetiy of rhe Co~~ii~~onii.r, Life ( 1686) to Charles Sackville. Earl of Dorset." N&Q N.S. 37 ( 1990): 296-97. Pinkus. Philip. "Satire and St. George." QQ 70 ( 1963): 30-49.

--- - "The New Satire of Augustan England." UTQ 38 ( 1969): 136-58. Piper. William Bowman. The Hel-oic Coriplet. Cleveland and London: P of Case Wçstem Rcservc U. 1969.

---. "The Invulncrability of Poetic Expericnce."

SCRri*4 ( 1987): L 1-23.

Plank. Jeffrey. "Augustan Conversions of Pastoral: Waller. Denham. and Edicscgc's Tlw M m of Mode." EL 12 (1985): 189-99. Pocock. Gordon. Boilenrr and the Nrrtrrw of Neo-Clmsicjsnt. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. 1980. Pollak. Ellen. The Poctics of Se.rucil Myth: Genclrr und kicology in the Verse o+'Swi/rcind Pope. Women in Culture and Society. Chicago and London: U or Chicago P. 1985. Pollard, Arthur, Satire. The Critical Idiom 7. London: Methuen. 1970. Pollock. Sir John. The Pupish Plor: A Sticciv in rhr H i s r o ~of~rhe Rrign oj-Chorles 11. 1003. Cambridge: Cam bridge U P. 1944. Post. Jonathan F. S. Hent? Vairghon: The Unfokding Vision. Princeton: Princeton UP. 1982. Potter. Lois. Secret Rites und Srcr-er Wt-iring: Roycrlist Lirrrcirirre ItiJi- l MO. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. 1989. Pound, Ezra. "Horace." Crisrrion 9 ( 1929-30):2 17-27. Powers. Doris C. English Forn~cilSurire: Elizclberhuu t o A~cgusrctn. Dc Psoprietatihus Litterarum. Senes Practiça 19. The Haguc and Paris: Mouton. 197 1. Poyet, Albert. "An Echo of Lewis Maidwell in Dryden's Translation of Juvcnal." Ccrhir,:sE 3 1 ( f 987): 63-64.

Previtt-Oston. C. W. Poliricol Sasire in English Pom-. Cam bridge: Cambndgc UP. 19 10. Prior. Mary. ed. Woiwn in Eng1iJ.h Society l.WO- l 8 W . London and New York: Methuen. 1985. Pritchard. Allan. "George Wither: Thc Poct as Prophci." SP 59 ( 1962): 1 1 1-30. Price. Martin. To the Pctloce of Wistiom: Strrrlirs in U)-dercrnd Eiirrgvfion~Dpden ro Blnkt.. Garden City: Doubleday. 1964. Proffitt. Bcssie. "Political Satire in Dryden's Ale-uinder's F P ~ . "TSLL 1 1 ( 1970): 1307- 16. Quinsey. K. M. "Sign-Post Püinti ng: Poeuy and Polern ic in Diydcn's The Medrll. " Rrsrotwtiori 16 ( 1992): 97- 109. Quivey. James. "Rhetoric and Framc: A Study o f Method in Three Satires by iMaivell." TSrL 18 ( 1973): 75-9 1.

Rader, Ralph W. "The Concept of Genre and Eightcenth-Centuiy Siudics." Nei~!Apprncichr.~ ru Eighteenth-Centfin: Liremure: Srlrcted Prrper.sji.o~~t the Englisli /n.sritrire. Ed. Phillip Harth. New York and London: Columbia UP. 1974. 79- 1 15. Raleigh. Walter. Sonle Authors: A Collection of Lireru~yEssa- 1896-1916. Oxford: Clarendon, 1923. Ramage. Edwin S.. David L. Sigsbee and Sigmund C. Frcdericks. Romrn Suri~irrsc d Their Satire: The Fine Arr of Criticisnz in Ancirnt Rome. Park Ridge. NJ: Noyes P. 1974. Randolph. Mary Claire. "The Medical Concept in English Renaissance Satiriç Theory: Ils Possible Relationships and Implications." SP 38 ( IY4 1 ): 125-57.

--- . "Pime Bayle's Case against Satire and Satinsts." N Q 18 1 (, 194 1 ): 3 1 O- 1 1. --- - "The Structural Design of the Formal Verse Satire." PQ 2 1 ( 1942): 368-84.

--- . "'Hide-and-Seek' Satires of the Restoration and XVIII-Century." N&Q 1 83 ( 1942): 2 13- 16.

---. "'Mr. Julian. Secretary of the mus es': Payuil in London." N&Q 184 ( 1943): 2-6. ---. "'Candour' in XVIUth-Century Satire." RES 20 ( 1044): 45-62.

Rawson. Claude. Srrri~rcind Sentinwtr 1660-f8.W Cambridge: Cam bridge L'P. 1 994. Raylor. Timothy. Cmdiers, Clubs, «nd Litr~nr- CriInire: Sir-John Mennrs, h n w s Sinith, and the Ortler of rhe Fm-. Newark: U or Delaware P. 1994 Real. Hermann J.. and Heinz J. Vienkcn. "Dryden's 'Lucid Intzrvall' Oncc More (Mac Flrcknor. Line 2 3 . " N&Q 34 ( 1987): 328-29. Reaske. Christophcr R. "A Shakespearcan Backdrop h r Dryden's MW Flrcbtur?" SQ 25 (1'374): 358. Reckford, Kenneth J. "Studies in Peisius." Hermes 90 ( 1962): 476-504. Revard. Stclla P. "Cowley'sAncro-eonriqw.sand thc Translation 01' the Greck Anacrcontca." A cm Conventris Nro-Lurini Tor-unror~ensi.~: Proceudings uf rhr Se wnrh Inrrr-nrirbncrl Congress of Neu-brin Sturlies. Eds. Alexander Dalzcll. Charles Fanüizzi. and Richard J. Schoeck. Medieval and Renaissancc Tcxis and Studies 86. Bingharnton: Center tor Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies. 199 1. 595-607.

Revermd. Cednç D.. 11. D r y l m Y.' F i d Porric Mode: The Friblrs. Philadelphia: U ol' Pennsylvania P. 1988. Reynolds. Beatrice. "Shilüng Currents in Histoncal Criùçism." /HI 14 ( 1953): 47 1-92. Richards. Edward Ames. H d i b m s in rhe Birt-lesque Ttntlition. New York: Columbia UP. 1937. Richetti. John J . Daniel Defoe. Twaync's English Authors Scrics 453. Boston: Twaync. 1987.

Ricks. Chnstopher. "Allusion: The Poct as Heir. " Srutlies in the Eighrrrnth Centurv 111: P q w r s Presenretl ur the Third David Niçhof Smith Mentor-id Sernincrt-,Cmbur-rn 1973. Eds. RF. Biissendcn. and J. C, Eade. Toronto and But'îilo: U of Toronto P. 1976. 209-40. Riebling, Barbara. "England Dellowercd and Unrnanned: Thc Sexual Imagc of Politics in Marvdl's 'Last Instructions."' SEL 35 ( 1995): 137-57. Riffaterre. Michael. "Prosopopeia." YFS 69 ( 1985): 107-23.

Rippy, Frances Mayhcw. Murthe.,r.Priot-. Twayne's English Authors Seiics 4 18. Boston: Twayne. 1986. Rivers. Isabel. The Portr? of Conseri~uti.st~i. 1600- 1745: A Str& of Ports ciitd Public Aflciirs fioin Jonsort ro Pope. Cambridge: Rivers P . 1973. Roberts. Siephcn K. "Public or Private? Revcngc and Rccovcry ai thc Rcstoi-ation ot' Charlcs II." BIHR 59 ( 1986): 172-88. Robinson. Christophcr. L~rciunrind his Influeilcr irt Eut-ope. C hapcl Hill: U of North Carolina P. 1979.

Robinson. Ken. "Juvcnal. Oldham and Dtyden." N&Q N.S. 26 ( 1979): 5 18-20.

---. "Sedley and Cowley."

N&Q N.S. 28 ( 198 1): 5 1.

--- . "The Authorship of Scaronnidcs. hy 'R. M."' N&Q N.S. 29 ( 1982): 532-23.

---. "Juvenal's Greeks and Oldham's Frençhmcn: Footboys. Viiuliing Boiits. and Usclcss Members." Restorution 6 ( 1982): 8 1-89,

--- . "The Art ot' Violence in Rochester's Satirc." YES 14 ( 1983): 93- 108.

--- . "The Authorship o l Oviditts E-rtcllrrnu ( 16'73). N&Q N.S. 33 (1986): 36-37.

Rogers. Philip George. The Diitçh

irj

rhe Mdruy. London: Oxford UP. 197O.

Rollins. Hydcr E. "Martin Parker. Ballad-Monger." MP 16 ( 19 19): 1 13-38.

--- . "Martin Parker: Additional Notes." MP 19 ( 192 1 ): 77-8 1. Roper, Allan. D ~ ~ d r nPurtic 's Kingcluim. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 1963. Rorty, Amelie Oksenberg. "A Literary Postscript: Characters. Persons. Selves. Individuais." The Idenri@ of P e m n s . Ed. Arnelie Oksenberg Rorty. Berkeley: U of California P. 1976. 30 1-23. Rosenberg. D. M. " Epic Warfare in Cowley and Milton. " Clio 22 ( 1992): 67-80. Rosenheim. Edward W. Swifr rrnd the Sutir-ist's Art. Chicago: U of Chicago P. 1963.

Rosenheim. James. "Reply to Richard Greaves and Jonathan Scott." Albioii 25 ( 1993): 649-5 1 Rothman. David J. "Hudibrns and Menippean Satire." ECenr 34 ( 1993): 23-44. - --. ltHiui!ibrcrsin the Dogperel Tradition." Resrornriui1 17 ( 1993): 15-29.

Rothstein. Eric. Rrstor-rition und Eighrernrh-Centtir? Poerp. Irj60-1780. The Routlcdge History of English Poetry 3. Boston. London. and Henlcy: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 198 1. Rudd. Niall. "Dryden on Horace and Juvcnal." UTQ 32 ( 1963): 155-69.

---. The Sutires of Horuce: A Sni& Cambridge: Cambridge UP. 1966. ---. Thenzes in Romnrî Scitir-e. Norman and London: U of Oklahoma P, 1986.

Rudmrn. Alan. Herzt? Vctughan. [Cardiff]: U of Walcs P. I Y8 1. Ruthven. K. K. The Cunceit. The Critical Idiorn 4. London: Methuen. 1969.

Sacks. Shrldon. Fiction nnd the Slzcrpe of Brlirf: A Stl& of Heiiry Fieiling wirh G1rncr.r crt Swij?, J o h m m . and Richnrcfson. Berkeley: U of Califoinia P. 1964. Sackton, Alexander H. "The Püradoxical Encomiurn in Elizabethan Drama." SEL 28 (1949): 83104. Saintsbury. George. A Histoty of Englislr Prosa~~fr.or?t rhe Trtdfth Certnir-y tu ihr Presrnr Da-. 1906; 1923. 2nd cd. 3 Vols. New York: Russell and Russell. 196 1.

Sdzman. Paul. "Abscilont und Aditophrl and The F~tgiriirrStrrtrsi~~cin. " Rrsrorarion 4 ( 1980): 11-13.

Sains, Henry W. "Swift's Satire of the Second Person." ELH 26 ( 1959): 36-44

Samuel. Ircne. "Milton on Comedy and Satirc." HLQ 35 ( 1972): 107-30. Saslow. Edward L. "Dryden as Historiographer Royal. and the Authorship of His Mrijrsrirs Decirmtion Defencled" MP 75 ( 1978): 16 1 -72. Sawday. Jonathan. "Rewriting a Revolution: History. Symhol. and Text in the Restoration." SCvnr 7 ( 1992): 17 1-99. Sçhakel. Peter J. "Dryden's Discoursr and 'Bi-Partite Structure' in the Design of Formal Vcrsc Satire." EUV 2 1.4 ( 1984): 33-4 1.

Schilling, Bernard N. D c d m and the Consrnwtive Myrh: A Rruding of "Abscrlont cind Achitophel. " New Haven and London: Yale UP. 196 1. Schueller. Herbert M. "Thc Rcnaissancc Forerunners of the Neo-Classical Lyric." MLN 63 (1947): 310-16. Scott. Jonathan. A l g o n o n Siclnqv mu1 the Rrsror*rrrionCrisis, 1677-1683. Cam hridgc: Cambridge UP. 1991.

---. "Restoration Proccss. Or. I r This Isn't a Party. Wc'rc Not Having a Good Timc."

Albion 25

(L993):6 19-37. Seidel, Michael. Scrtir-ic Inheritrrrw. Rub~klisr o S r w w . Princeton: Princeton UP. 1979. ---. "Crisis Rhetonc and Satiric Powcr." NLH 20 ( 1988): 165-86.

Seidensticker. Bernd. cd. Suryspirl. Wcgc dcr Foischung 579. Darmstadt: Wisscnschaftliçhc Buchgesellschaft. 1989. Selden. Raman. "Roughness in Satirc from Horace to Dryden." MLR 66 ( 197 1): 264-72.

---. "Juvenal and Rcstoration Modcs o l Trmslation." MLR 68 ( 1973): 48 1-93.

---. "Hobbes and Latc Mctaphysiçnl Poctry." JHI 35 ( 1974): 197-210. ---. English Verse Sritb-e i.WO-f7tij. London: Gcorgc Allcn and Unwin. 1978.

---. "Rochester, Shadwell and Mr. Fribblc." NScQ N.S. 28 ( 198 1): 2 10- 1 1.

--- . "OIdham. Pope. and Rcstora~ionSatire." YES 1.1 (1984): 109-26. ---- "The Young Marcellus of our Tongue: John Oldham's Poetry." Rrsroimiun 9 ( 1985): 2630.

--- . ''Rochester and Oldham: 'High Rants in Profancss."' SCent 6 ( 199 1): 89- 103. Sellin, Paul R. Daniel Heinsius ciml Stuart EnglrntL London: Oxford UP. 1968.

---. "Sources of Julius Caesar Sçaliger's Porticvs Libri

as a Guide to Renaissance Poetiçs." Acru Scaligrricinci: Acres clil Colloqiie Inrernritionnlr O r p n i s t ! pout- le Cinquième Cenrenuire {le lu Nctisscince clr Jules-Césur Sculiger. Eds. J. Cubelicr de Beynac and M. Magnien. Agen: Société AcadCmique d'Agen. 1986. 75-83. Septem

Sembower. Charles Jacob. nie Life ont1 the Port>? of Chrirlrs Corton. Publications or the University of Pennsylvania New York: D. Appleton and Company. 19 1 1.

Seronsy. Cecil C. "The Doctrine of Cyclical Recun-cnçc and Some Relaicd Ideas in the Work ul' Samuel Daniel." SP 54 (1957): 387-407. Seward, Desmond. The Fir-sr B O I I I - ~ HYIII'I' I I : IV, King crf Frrrnce and Nrivatw. Boston: Gambit. 1971. Sharpc, Kevin. and Stevcn N. Zwickcr. eds. The Pulirics ofDiscu~it-sr.Los Angelcs: Li 01Calii'oinia P. 1987.

---..and Pcter Lake. cds. G