The Press.
London, England, 1858-05-22 00:00:00

;.:~;:

notice Mr. Rawlinson's translation. Sir J. G.
Wilkinson's contributions display throughout a
verycomplete knowledge. of the subject, but his
style is somewhat languid, his conjectures and
philosophical explanations of the Egyptian
mythology are often rather trivial and super-
fluous as well, being totally uncertified, to use
Mr. Grote's favourite word. He is more given
to deriving Greek institutions, customs, and
myths from Egypt than we can approve, and
appears to have obscured his conception of the
genuine Greek mythology by giving too much
attention to the philosophical perversion of it
which was set up at Alexandria.

Oxford Essays, 1858. Contributed by Members
of the University. London :J. W. Parker
and Son.

Or the seven essays which the volume before
us contains, there are three that will pro-
bably be read by everybody,—one upon " The
Poetry of Pope," by Professor Conington ;
another upon " The Theories of Parliamentary
Reform," by Lord Robert Cecil ; and a third on
"Oxford University Reform," by Mr. Goldwin
Smith. Sir Alexander Grant contributes a paper
on " The Ancient Stoics," which, together with
• remaining three, we shall reserve for a future

tposition distinguished by so much
modesty and good taste as Professor
we are sorry we cannot speak more
, but, after a most careful considers-
we are driven to inquire with what
was written. In his concluding para-
. Professor observes :
time to conclude a task which it is perhaps
to have undertaken. I should be glad to
what has been here attempted insufficiently
adequately performed by some other writer.
has hardly received yet the careful critical
rhich it deserves. The last century, indeed,
johnson'a masterly critique, and the more
though less penetrating, survey by Warton.
aware of anything in our own day which
-joirements of the subject. At one time it
batt.le•field fur rival poets—Bowles, Campbell,
I fight out their contending theories ; but no
for Pope what Scott hes done for Dryden,
biography which is a real contribution to the
:inglirth poetry. Parts of his worki have been
effectively by Professor Wilson and Mr. de
• there is no single judgment of his various
iy of being named with those articles on
whisth the Edinburgh Review has been saccea•
1 by two of iti most distinguished contri-
the union of great knowledge of literary
great power of poetical criticism is rare; where
ies exist together there are other fields to
; and it is possible that we may have to wait
before our literature receives the desired

under what obligation did Professor
lie to undertake a critical examina-
Pope, unless he could perform it ade-
We agree with him that such an
desideratum in modern criticism.

world could have waited.

" The

Pope" is not like some question
interest, on which the leaders of
opinion are obliged to pronounce a judg-
tbject to the reversal of posterity, when-
merits of the writer have been more fully
can be more impartially weighed.
the other hand, we had thought that
Publication in which this essay appears was
particularly intended to be the organ of ma-
tured opinion, and to convey the results of special
ive study. " The last century can
our author, "of Johnson's masterly
but I am not aware of anything in our
which meets the requirements of the
Now, Mr. Conington must of course
• that the requirements of the subject
in our own day as in Johnson's, or that
not. If they are, then Johnson's criticism
sufficient ; if they are not, then a modern
should be something different from john-
s Mr. Conington, though occasionally
from the Doctor in the degree of praise
warded, has not travelled one inch beyond
in which Johnson trod—has pushed
subject into no new light, and tried it
tests. his observations on Pope's
works contain nothing original or re-
, while his introductory inquiry into the
'that "correctness" for which the poet
braced just stops short at the point
might have become useful and interest-
be sure, to such persons as Lord Ma-

7a7i;7:=-4 ,

attention to to
which was set tt
Oxford Essays,
of the Unive]
and Son.
OF the seven 1
us contains, th
bably be read b
Poetry of Poi
another upon "
Reform," by Lo
"Oxford Unive
Smith. Sir Ale
on " The Andel
the remaining ti
occasion.
Of a composit
unaffected mode:
Conington's, we
favourably ; but
tion of it, we at
purpose it was w
graph, the Profe
But it is time to
presumptuous to ha
think that what hi
would be adequate
Pope's poetry has I
examination which i
can boast of Johns,
elaborate, though
But I am not aware
meets the requiren
was made a batue•fi
and 13yron—to fight
poet has done fur Pi
producing a biugrap
history of English
examined effectivel
Quircey ; but. there
writings worthy of
Dryden with whizb
sively enriched by
boors. But the
history with great p
those qualities exi.
invite them ; and ii
Rome time before
accession.
Now, under IN
Covington lie t
tion of Pope, u
quately ? We
essay is a des
But the world
Poetry of Pope
of newborn int(
literary opinion
ment, subject to
ever the merits (
sifted, and can
While, on the a
the Publication
one particularly
tared opinion, ai
and exclusive
boast," says our
" critique, but I
" own day whic'
" subject.' No
mean either tha
arc the same in 01
they are not. If
is still sufficient
critique should 1
son's. But Mr
differing from tl
to be awarded, 1
the circle in wl
forward his subj
by no new tes
separate works
workable, while
nature of that '
was celebrated
where it might
ing. To be stu