oved state of ancient learning. Instead
of producing examples of this intemperance, which the Greek Theology was
peculiarly calculated to indulge, I shall only observe in general, that
we are mistaken in thinking that the Genius of a Poet is indicated by
the diversified incidents which enter into his Fable. True Genius, even
in its most early productions, be discovered rather by _vivid_ and
_picturesque descriptions_, than by any circumstances however
extraordinary in the _narration_ of _events_. It is no difficult matter
to conceive a series of fictitious incidents, and to connect them
together in one story, though it requires judgment to do this in such a
manner, as that the whole may have some happy and continued allusion to
truth. We can imagine, for instance, with great ease something as
impossible as Ariosto's Magician pursuing the man who had taken off his
head. But it will be found a much more difficult task, either to throw
out one of those strokes of Nature which penetrate the heart, and cleave
it with terror and with pity; or to paint Thought in such striking
colours, as to render it immediately visible to the eye[83].

[Footnote 83: Upon the principle established here, we may account
in some measure for Voltaire's apparently paradoxical assertion,
with regard to the comparative merit of Homer and Tasso. The
Italian (says that spirited writer) has more conduct, variety and
justness than the Greek. Admitting the truth of this reflection,
we might still reply, that the principal merit of the Iliad,
considered as the production of Genius, lies in the grandeur of
the sentiments, the beauty and sublimity of the illustrations, and
the _original_ strokes which are wrought into the description of
the _principal Actors_. In all these respects we may venture to
affirm, that Homer remains without a superior among Authors
unaided by Inspiration; and the reader must be left to judge
whether or not it is from these criterions that we estimate the
Genius of a Poet. Our Author proceeds upon the same principles to
compare the Orlando Furioso with the Odyssey, and give a
preference to the former. The merit of these works may be
ascertained in some measure, by the rules we have already
established. We need only to add further on this head, that among
many beauties we meet with examples of the turgid and bombast in
the work of Ariosto; from which tha