The Art of Poetry: an Epistle to the Pisos Q. Horatii Flacci Epistola Ad Pisones, De Arte Poetica. — Background and Themes

Colman’s Defense of Order

Colman directly confronts the charge, led by Scaliger, that Horace’s Art of Poetry is “totally void of art.” He acknowledges that the work is not a systematic prose treatise, but insists that its epistolary form and poetic license do not excuse disorder. Colman points to Horace’s own praise of “the beauty and excellence of Order (ordinis virtus et Venus!)” as evidence that the poem is intentionally structured. He argues that the apparent digressions serve a rhetorical purpose, guiding the reader through principles of poetic composition in a conversational manner.

Shakespeare’s Seven Ages as a Model

In his notes, Colman praises Shakespeare for improving upon Aristotle and Horace by “contriving to introduce, and discriminate, every one of the seven ages” in Jaques’ speech from As You Like It. He observes that Shakespeare assigned distinct “station and character” to stages that earlier theorists found too similar—such as puberty, youth, manhood, and old age—transforming them into the lover, soldier, justice, and pantaloon. This example illustrates Colman’s method of using English literature to validate classical precepts.

The Chorus and Dramatic Probability

Colman devotes considerable attention to Horace’s precept that “An actor’s part the Chorus should sustain.” He cites Aristotle and the practice of Greek drama to argue that the chorus enhances “probability” and the “striking resemblance of real life.” He notes that Racine revived the chorus in Athalie and Esther, and that Milton’s Samson Agonistes was a “master-piece” in this regard. Colman laments that modern playwrights have abandoned the chorus, which he considers essential for moral utility and dramatic verisimilitude.

Colman’s edition is best approached as a dialogue between translator and reader. The notes are not mere glosses but sustained arguments that engage with classical scholarship and contemporary criticism. Readers interested in the reception of Horace or in eighteenth-century literary theory will find Colman’s commentary as revealing as the poem itself.

Colman’s patient defense of Horace’s wandering structure reminded me of how Webster, too, trusted order to emerge from honest feeling rather than rigid design. There is a quiet kinship between a poet defending his digressions and an orator letting conviction shape his sentences. I found myself thinking of Select Speeches of Daniel Webster, 1817-1845 — Context and Discussion the same way—not as argument, but as weathered, breathing testimony.