of little size or value"?

To me it appears impossible to read the line without seeing that Pope
had in his mind the latter idea, that of poor, little, shabby,
statureless monosyllables, as opposed to big, bouncing, brave, sonorous
polysyllables, such as Aristophanes called [Greek: hræmata hippokræmna].
After all, however, it would do me very little damage to concede that he
intended the meaning which [Greek: ph]. appears to attribute to the
epithet "low", for _if he did_ mean "_vulgar_" words, it is evident that
he considered vulgarity in such matters inseparable from littleness, as
the "low" words must, if his line is not to lose its point altogether,
have been _ten_ in number, that is, _every one a monosyllable_, a
"small" word.

Take it which way you will, the leading idea is that of "littleness;"
moreover, there is no propriety in the word "creep" as applied to
_merely vulgar_ words, while words petty in size may, with great
justice, be said to "creep" in a "petty pace," requiring no less than
ten steps to walk the length of a line.

Pope was criticising compositions intended to pass as poetry of the best
kind. Will [Greek: ph]. point out in any existing poem of such
profession and character, a single heroic line, consisting of _ten_
words, _all_ which _ten_ words shall be "low" in the sense of "vulgar"?
Can even the Muses of burlesque and slang furnish such an instance?

Has not [Greek: ph]. suffered himself to be carried too far by his
exultation in being "down" (the last-named Muse has kindly supplied me
with the expression) upon a piece of verbal carelessness on the part of