b o o k « poet, yet he has failed in many others ; but it would be
. . “ uncandid to infill upon fuch defedts in a writer who firft
“ introduced the drama among his countrymen. TheFrench.
“ overlook in their Corneille ftill greater faults.” “ His
“ comedies,” continues the fame author, “ contain much
“ humour ; but I do not imagine that our dramatick writers
“ will adopt him for their model : for he frequently excites
“ the laughter o f the fpedlator at the expence of his cooler
'“ judgement*. Neverthelefs, they prefent fufficient paf-
“ fages.to prove, that he would have attained a greater de-
“ gree o f perfedlion in this' line, i f he had paid more atten-
“ tion to paint our manners, and to follow the taite o f the
“ bell foreign writers.”
Befide dramatick writings, Sumorokof attempted every
fpecies o f poetry, excepting the epick. He wrote love-
fongs, idyls, fables, fatires, anacreonticks, elegies, verfions of
the Pfalms, and Pindarick odes. Superior to Lomonozof f
in. the compofitions o f the drama, he was yet infèrior to
him in Pindarick writings. “ Though his odes,” adds his
biographer, “ are diftinguifhed by their eafy flow o f verfifi-
cation, by their harmony, foftnefs, and grace, yet théy are
“ far from reaching that elevation and fire which charac-
* W e il es au ch ein L a ch en g ie b t, nach ag re ed with him in th e fo llow in g words :
welchem d e r Z u fch an e r n icht woh l mit fich “ Je fou fc ris entièrement à tou t ce que
“ feibft Z u fr ie d en iil dafs e r g e la ch t h a t . “ vous, dites de M o liè re e t de la comédie
L ite ra lly , “ Since h e occasions a lau gh te r, “ L a rmo yan te, qui à la hon te de la nation a
“ at w h ich the fp e& a to r is not well.fatisfied “ fucced é au .feu l vrai genre comique porté
“ th a t he has la u gh t.” Does the biograp her “ a perfeétion p a r l ’ inimitable M o liere.”
mean by this paffage, that the w ito f .S um o - B a ch . R u if . Bib. fo r 17 78 , p . 15 3 .
r o k o f was often too fa r c ic a l, and d eg en e- J T h e re v v a s an u n fo r tun a te riv a lry bela
t e d too much into a «low fpecies o f h u r twe en thefe two poets : e a ch wiih ed to ex-
mour ? I f fo , le t th e au th o r anfwer fo r c e l in th e oth er’ s line ; and ea ch failed in
h imfelf. In a le tte r to V o lta ir e , h e com- th e attep ip t. T h e ac count o f this rivalry
plain s th a t his countrymen had begun to between L om o n o z o f and Sum o rok o f might
adopt, tha't w retch ed fpecies o f comp olition , unfortuna tely, add an o th er a r t ic le fo r .the
th e fentimental comedy, inile ad o f th e w it au th o r o f L e s Q uerelles L itera ires.
an d h umour o f M o liere ; and V o lta ir e ■
“ térize
“ terize thofe o f Lomonozof. Thefe two great poets had chap.
“ each their peculiar talents : the one diiplaye’d in his ftyle. V I!‘
“ all the majeily, ftrength, and fublimity o f the Ruflian
f tongue ; and the other all its harmony, foftnefs, and ele-
“ gance. The elegies o f Sumorokof are full o f tendernefs :
“ his idyls give a true picture o f the pâftôral life in all the
“ pleafing fimplicity o f unimproved nature without defcend-
“ ing to vulgarity; and may ferve as models in this fpecies o f
“ compofition in all things excepting in ftrict morality. His
I fatires are the heft in the Ruffian language, but are ex-
! tremely unequal, and deferve to have been wrought with
“ more plan and regularity. In writing his fables his pen
“ feems to have been guided by the Mufes and Graces.*; and
“ I do not hefitate, i f not to prefer them, at leaft to compare
“ them with thofe o f Fontaine.”
. Sumorokof was alfo author o f a few ihort and detached
hiftorical pieces. A Chronicle o f Mofcow, in which he re*
lates the origin o f that city ; and abridges the reigns o f its monarchs
from Ivan Danilovitch to Feodor Alexievitch. A
Hiftory o f the firft infurre6lion o f the Strelitz in 1682, by
which Ivan was appointed joint-fovereign .with Peter the Great;
and the princefs Sophia regent.— An accounts o f Stenko Ra-
zin’s rebellion. His ftyle in thefe pieces is faid to be clear and
perfpicuous, but fbmewhat too flowery and. poetical for profe.
Sumorokof obtained hy his merit the favour and protection
of his fovereign. Elizabeth gave him the rank o f brigadier ;
appointed him cl ire ¿tor o f the Ruffian theatre, and fettled
upon him a penfion o f y 400 per annum». Catharine, JL
* T h ii^ o p in io n feems to b e general ;. p . 34.2,
Mais tous les ap p lau d iflem en ts -fe fon t “ Ses fablôs peuvent- ê t re comparéës à c e
^ reumis en faveur de ces fab les. O n ne “ q u ’ on a" fa it de mieux dans ce g en re , de.-
peut leur tefu fe r la premiêrè p la c e après “ puis l’inimitablfeLa Fon ta in e .’’ L e C lé r cL
celles d e là .F o n ta in e .” L ’Evefque^v. V«. p» 77,.
created