1726 Theon

Theon

1512-17 vnequall...base] Theobald (1726, p. 71-72): “In the first Place, unequal matched by the Position must be a Nominative, and consequently relate to Pyrrhus. Now if Pyrrhus was unequal matched, in the Sense and general Acceptation we must understand that he was over-match’d, and had the worst of it: Not that he was an Over-match for Priam, which was the Truth of the Fact. I believe therefore it should be, as the second folio Edition has it, (and the Impression, said to be revised by Mr. Rowe, whether by Chance or Design;) with an Alteration in the Pointing; ‘–––––––– Unequal MATCH!’ For the Substantive thus, with a Note of Admiration after it, relates indifferently to Pyrrhus and Priam, and signifies that each was unequal to the other, the first in Strength, the latter in Weakness. But to go lower into the Passage, (tho’ all the Editions agree in the Reading,) I can hardly be perswaded it is printed as the Poet intended it; or that he would have industriously chosen to prefix an Epithet to Ilium, which makes a Paradox in the Context. If Ilium was then senseless, why should it seem to feel the Blow? Or, if Ilium was senseless, why should it then seem to feel it? For one of the two Ways it must be taken. I know very well it may be resolved thus; that Ilium, quoàd the Bricks and stones, was absolutely senseless; yet the Buildings, falling into the Fire just at the Instant when Priam fell to the Ground, seemed, as it were, to be sensible of that Blow. I confess, this may be a poetical Inference; but a little hard-strained, and in no wise necessary. Perhaps, with a small Variation in the Text and Pointing, the Passage may lie more easy and natural thus. ‘–––––––– Unequal match! Pyrrhus at Priam drives; in Rage strikes wide; But with the Whif and Wind of his fell Sword Th’unnerved Father falls DOWN SENSELESS. ––– Ilium, Seeming to feel this Blow, with flaming Top Stoops to his Base, &c.’ I propose this last Alteration but as a Conjecture, and without laying any Stress upon it: and the rather too, because, perhaps, the whole Passage concerning Priam and Hecuba may not be of our Poet’s writing, but a Quotation from some Play of a Contemporary, which he had a mind to put in the Mouth of a stroling Player. I should, indeed, suspect it to be our Poet’s from one Reason only; and that is, from its Subject. I think the Observation has never yet been made, and therefore I shall give it here; That there is scarce a Play throughout all his Works, in which it was possible to introduce the Mention of them, where he has not by Simile, Allusion, or otherwise, hinted at the Trojan Affairs; so fond was he of that Story.”