Heathen religion in verse, than in prose.  Christian poets, as well as Christian preachers, the business of both being to instruct the people, though the last only are wholly appropriated to it, should endeavour to confirm, and spread their own religion.  If a divine should begin his sermon with a solemn prayer to Bacchus or Apollo, to Mars or Venus, what would the people think of their preacher? and is it not as really, though not equally absurd, for a poet in a great and serious poem, wherein he celebrates some wonderful and happy event of divine providence, or magnifies the illustrious instrument that was honoured to bring the event about, to address his prayer to false deities, and cry for help to the abominations of the heathen?’

Mr. Gildon, in his Compleat Art of Poetry, after speaking of our author in the most respectful terms, says, ’that notwithstanding his merit, this admirable author did not think himself upon the same footing with Homer.’  But how different is the judgment of Mr. Dennis, who, in this particular, opposes his friend Mr. Gildon.

’Blackmore’s action (says he) has neither unity, integrity, morality, nor universality, and consequently he can have no fable, and no heroic poem.  His narration is neither probable, delightful, nor wonderful.  His characters have none of these necessary qualifications.—­The things contained in his narrations, are neither in their own nature delightful nor numerous enough, nor rightly disposed, nor surprizing, nor pathetic;’ nay he proceeds so far as to say Sir Richard has no genius; first establishing it as a principle, ’That genius is known by a furious joy, and pride of soul, on the conception of an extraordinary hint.  Many men (says he) have their hints without these motions of fury and pride of soul; because they want fire enough to agitate their spirits; and these we call cold writers.  Others who have a great deal of fire, but have not excellent organs, feel the fore-mentioned motions, without the extraordinary hints; and these we call fustian writers.’

And he declares, that Sir Richard hath neither the hints nor the motions[2].  But Dennis has not contented himself, with charging Blackmore with want of genius; but has likewise the following remarks to prove him a bad Church of England man:  These are his words.  ’All Mr. Blackmore’s coelestial machines, as they cannot be defended so much as by common received opinion, so are they directly contrary to the doctrine of the church of England, that miracles had ceased a long time before prince Arthur come into the world.  Now if the doctrine of the church of England be true, as we are obliged to believe, then are all the coelestial machines of prince Arthur unsufferable, as wanting not only human but divine probability.  But if the machines are sufferable, that is, if they have so much as divine probability, then it follows of necessity, that the doctrine of the church is false; so that I leave it to every impartial clergyman to consider.’