of scansion by itself:  all these points, so essential to a true explanation of the nature of English verse, though, for the most part, well maintained by some prosodists, are nevertheless denied by some, so that opposite opinions may be cited concerning them all.  I would not suggest that all or any of these points are thereby made doubtful; for there may be opposite judgements in a dozen cases, and yet concurrence enough (if concurrence can do it) to establish them every one.

OBS. 3.—­An ingenious poet and prosodist now living,[484] Edgar Allan Poe, (to whom I owe a word or two of reply,) in his “Notes upon English Verse,” with great self-complacency, represents, that, “While much has been written upon the structure of the Greek and Latin rhythms, comparatively nothing has been done as regards the English;” that, “It may be said, indeed, we are without a treatise upon our own versification;” that “The very best” definition of versification[485] to be found in any of “our ordinary treatises on the topic,” has “not a single point which does not involve an error;” that, “A leading deft in each of these treatises is the confining of the subject to mere versification, while metre, or rhythm, in general, is the real question at issue;” that, “Versification is not the art, but the act’—­of making verses;” that, “A correspondence in the length of lines is by no means essential;” that “Harmony” produced “by the regular alternation of syllables differing in quantity,” does not include “melody;” that “A regular alternation, as described, forms no part of the principle of metre:”  that “There is no necessity of any regularity in the succession of feet;” that, “By consequence,” he ventures to “dispute the essentiality of any alternation, regular or irregular, of syllables long and short:”  that, “For anything more intelligible or more satisfactory than this definition [i. e., G. Brown’s former definition of versification,] we shall look in vain in any published treatise upon the subject;” that, “So general and so total a failure can be referred only to some radical misconception;” that, “The word verse is derived (through versus from the Latin verto, I turn,) and * * * * it can be nothing but this derivation, which has led to the error of our writers upon prosody;” that, “It is this which has seduced them into regarding the line itself—­the versus, or turning—­as an essential, or principle of metre;” that, “Hence the term versification has been employed as sufficiently general, or inclusive, for treatises upon rhythm in general;” that, “Hence, also, [comes] the precise catalogue of a few varieties of English lines, when these varieties are, in fact, almost without limit;” that, “I,” the aforesaid