The compounds in the poems of Dryden show this; of his examples of Type I—the substantive compounds—the majority are merely the juxtaposition of two appositional nouns, as _brother-angels_ (“Killigrew,” 4); or, more rarely, where the first element has a descriptive or adjectival force, as _traitor-friend_ (“Palamon,” II, 568). Not much more imaginative power is reflected in Dryden’s compound epithets; his instances of Types III and IV include “_cloud-dispelling_ winds” (“Ovid,” Met. I, 356), “_sun-begotten_ tribe” (_ibid._, III, 462), with more original examples like “_sleep-procuring_ wand.” Next comes a large number of instances of Types V and VI: “_thick-spread_ forest” (“Palamon,” II, 123), “_hoarse-resounding_ shore” (“Iliad” I, 54), as well as many compounded with _long_-, _well_-, _high_-, etc. Most of these examples of Types V and VI are scarcely compounds at all, for after such elements as “long,” “well,” “much,” the hyphen could in most cases be omitted without any loss of power. Of Dryden’s compound epithets it may be said in general that they reflect admirably his poetic theory and practice; they are never the product of a “fine frenzy.” At the same time not a few of them seem to have something of that genius for satirical expression with which he was amply endowed. Compounds like _court-informer_ (“Absalom,” 719), “the rebels’ _pension-purse_” (_ibid._, Pt. II, 321), Og, from a _treason-tavern_ rolling home (_Ibid._, 480) play their part in the delivery of those “smacks in the face” of which Professor Saintsbury speaks in his discussion of Dryden’s satiric manipulation of the heroic couplet.[167] In the verse of Pope, compound formations are to be found in large numbers. This may partly be attributed, no doubt, to the amount of translation included in it, but even in his original poetry there are many more instances than in the work of his great predecessor. When engaged on his translation of Homer the prevalence of compounds naturally attracted his attention, and he refers to the matter more than once in his Preface.[168] As might be expected from the apostle of “correctness,” he lays down cautious and conservative “rules” of procedure. Such should be retained “as slide easily of themselves into an English compound, without violence to the ear, or to the received rules of composition, as well as those which have received the sanction from the authority of our best poets, and are become familiar through their use of them.”[169]