Europe a Woman, Child, or Dotard rule, COMMENTARY. 95 VER. 95. Know, God and Nature, &c.] Having thus proved what he had propofed, the premiffes naturally led him into a moral reflection, with which he concludes his first part, namely, that con 'ancy is to be expected in no human Character whatsoever; but is to be found only in God and his Laws: That as to Man, he is not only perpetually shifting and varying, even while within the verge of his own nature; but is frequently flying out into each extreme, both above and below it: Now affociating in good earnest with Brutes; and now again affecting the imaginary converfation of Angels. [See Effay on Man, Ep. ii. Ver. 8.] "A bird of paffage! gone as foon as found; "Now in the Moon perhaps, now under ground." NOTES. fumed it to gratify his Queen; and Victor Amadeus II. King of Sardinia, who refigned the crown, and trying to reassume it, was imprifoned till his death. P. VER. .93. Europe a Woman, Child, or Dotard rul, - And just her wifeft monarch made a foil?] The Czarina, the King of France, the Pope, and the above mentioned King of Sardinia. VER. 95. Know, God and Nature, &c.] By Nature is not here meant any imaginary fubftitute of God, called a Plaftic nature; but God's moral laws: And this obfervation was inferted with great propriety and difcretion, in the conclufion of a long detail of the various characters of men: for, from the difcording eftimate of human actions, arifing from the difcordancy of men's characters, Montagne and others have been bold enough to infinuate, that morality is founded more in cuftom and fashion than in the nature of things. The .. A bird of paffage! gone as foon as found; Now in the Moon perhaps, now under ground. II. In vain the Sage, with retrofpective eye, Would from th' apparent What conclude the Why, 100 Infer the Motive from the Deed, and fhew, COMMENTARY. II. VER. 99. In vain the Sage, &c.] The Author having fhewn the difficulties in coming to the knowledge and true characters of men, enters now upon the fecond divifion of his Poem, which is of the wrong means that both Philofophers and Men of the world have employed in furm:unting those difficul ties. He had, in the introduction, fpoken of the abfurd conduct of both, in defpifing the affiftance of each other: He now juftifies his cenfure by an examination of their peculiar doctrines; and, to take them in their own way, confiders them, as they would be confidered, feparately. And first, of the Philofopher, whofe principal mistake is in fuppofing that actions bet de ypher the motive of the actor. This he confutes (from Ver. 98 to 109.) by fhewing that different actions proceed often from the fame mitive; whether of accident, as difappointed views; or of temperature, as an aduft complexion; which he thus illuftrates, "Behold! if Fortune or a Miftrefs frowns," &c. NOTES. fpeaking therefore of a moral law of God, as having all the conftancy and durability of his Effence, had an high expediency in this place. VER. 98. Now in the Moon perhaps, now under ground.] The beauty of this line confifts in its carrying on the allufion: thefe being two of the conjectures concerning the retir em ent of birds of pauze. Behold! if Fortune or a Mistress frowns, Some plunge in bus'ness, others fhave their crowns: Not always Actions fhew the man: we find Who does a kindness, is not therefore kind; 110 COMMENTARY. In judging therefore of motives by actions, the Philofopher muft needs be frequently mistaken; because the paffion or appetite, which, when impelling to action, we call the motive, may be equally gratified in the purfuit of very different measures. VER. 109. Not always Actions fhew the man: &c.] The Philofopher's fecond mistake is, that actions decypher the character of the actor. This too, the Author confutes (from Ver. 108 to 135.) and, as in correcting the foregoing mistake, he proved, that different actions often proceed from the fame mofo here he proves, that the fame action often proceeds from different motives: thus a kind action, he obferves, as commonly arifeth from the accidents of profperity or fine weather, as from a natural difpofition to humanity; a modeft action, as well from pride, as humility; a brave action, as eafily from habit or fashion, as magnanimity; and a prudent tive; NOTES. VER. 107. The fame aduft complexion has impell'd Charles to the Convent, Philip to the Field.] Philip II. was of an atrabilaire complexion. He derived it from his father Charles V. whofe health, the hiftorians of his Perhaps Profperity becalm'd his breast; Perhaps the Wind just shifted from the east: Who combats bravely, is not therefore brave, 115 COMMENTARY. action, as often from vanity as wifdom. Now the character being really determined by the motives; and various, nay, contrary matives, producing the fame action; the action can never decypher the character of the actor. But further (conti pues the Poet) if we attend to what hath been faid, we shall difcover another circumftance in the cafe, which will not only make it extremely difficult, but abfolutely impracticable to decypher the character by the action: and that is, the dif cordancy of action in the fame character; a neceffary confequence of the two principles proved above, that different actions proceed from the fame motive, and that the fame action preceeds from different motives. NOTES. life tell us, was frequently difordered by bilious fevers. But what was most extraordinary, the fame complexion not only drove them varioufly, but made each act contrary to his cha racter; Charles, who was an active man, when he retired into a Convent; Philip, who was a man of the closet, when he gave the battle of St. Quintin. VER 117. Who reajons wifely, &c.] By reafoning is not here meant fpeculating; but deliberating and refolving in public counfels: for this inftance is given as one, of a variety of actions. But grant that Actions beft difcover man; Take the most strong, and fort them as you can. The few that glare each character must mark, What will do with such as disagree? you 120 Suppress them, or miscall them Policy? COMMENTARY. 125 VER. 119. But grant that Actions, &c.] But (continues our Author) if you will judge of man by his actions, you are not to select fuch only as you like, or can manage; you must fairly take all, you find: Now, when you have got thefe together, they will prove fo very difcordant, that no confiftent character can poffibly be made out of them. What then is to be done? Will you fupprefs all those you cannot reconcile to the few capital actions which you chuse for the foundation of your character? But this the laws of truth will not permit. Will you then mifcall them? and fay they were not the natural workings of the man, but the difguifes of the politician? But what will you get by this, befides reverfing the best known character, and making the owner of it the direct oppofite of himfelf? However, (fays our Author) this is the way which the reasoning and philofophic historian hath been always ready to take with the actions of great men; of which he gives two famous instances in the life of Cæfar. The conclufion from the whole is, that actions do not fhew the man. |