By what I have shewn in the preceding Letters, it sufficiently appears
that _Virgil_ and _Milton_ had good reason to begin with _Hinc canere
incipiam_. _Nunc te Bacche canam._ _Arma Virumque cano._ _Sing
Heavenly Muse._ Their Verse is all _Musick_, and that is the reason
why their Poems please, though ever so often read: And all Poetry that
is not attended with Harmony, is properly speaking no Poetry at all.

Let the Sense be ever so fine, if the _Verse_ is not _melodious_, the
Reader will undoubtedly find himself soon overtaken with Drowsiness.
But what I chiefly hope I have made out, is, that _Rhyme_ does not owe
its Original to _Druids_, or to _dreaming Monks_, since it is certain
there is more _Rhyme_ in _Virgil_, than there can be in any _English_
Translation of his Works. _English_ Verse never admits but of two
Syllables that Rhyme in two Lines. But in _Virgil_, it is not easy to
tell how many Rhymes there are in a single Line; as for Example,

"_O nimium Coelo, & pelago confise sereno,_

"_Et sola in siccâ secum spatiatur arenâ._

And the like. But what would you say, if I was to observe to you all
that _Erythræus_ has writ of the Rhyme _Cum intervallo, & sine
intervallo_ in _Virgil_? Of the Rhyme _sine intervallo_ there are four
Examples in the two first Lines of the _Æneid_, namely, in the first,
_no_--_tro_, and _qui_--_pri_. In the second, _to_--_pro_, and _que_--
_ve_.

"_Arma virumque can[=o], tr[=o]jæ qu[=i] pr[=i]mus ab oris Italiam,
fat[=o] pr[=o]fugus, Lavinaqu[=e] v[=e]nit._--