"better read in the Greek than in the English poets; that all writers ought to study this cri tique, as the best account I have ever seen of the "ancients; that the model of tragedy, he has here "given, is excellent, and extremely correct; but "that it is not the only model of all tragedy, be"cause it is too much circumscribed in plot, cha"racters, &c. and, lastly, that we may be taught "here justly to admire and imitate the ancients, "without giving them the preference with this au"thor, in prejudice to our own country.

"Want of method in this excellent treatise makes "the thoughts of the author sometimes obscure.

"His meaning, that pity and terrour are to be "moved, is, that they are to be moved as the means "conducing to the ends of tragedy, which are plea"sure and instruction.

"And these two ends may be thus distinguished. "The chief end of the poet is to please; for his "immediate reputation depends on it.

"The great end of the poem is to instruct, which "is performed by making pleasure the vehicle of "that instruction; for poesy is an art, and all arts "are made to profit. Rapin.

The pity, which the poet is to labour for, is for "the criminal, not for those or him whom he has "murdered, or who have been the occasion of the "tragedy. The terrour is likewise in the punish"ment of the same criminal, who, if he be repre"sented too great an offender, will not be pitied; if "altogether innocent, his punishment will be unjust.

"Another obscurity is, where he says, Sophocles "perfected tragedy by introducing the third actor:

6.6.

that is, he meant three kinds of action; one company singing, or speaking; another playing on the "musick; a third dancing.

"To make a true judgment in this competition be"twixt the Greek poets and the English, in tragedy: Consider, first, how Aristotle has defined a tra"gedy. Secondly, what he assigns the end of it to "be. Thirdly, what he thinks the beauties of it. Fourthly, the means to attain the end proposed. "Compare the Greek and English tragick poets justly, and without partiality, according to those "rules.

66

Then, secondly, consider whether Aristotle has "made a just definition of tragedy; of its parts, of "its ends, and of its beauties; and whether he, having not seen any others but those of Sophocles, "Euripides, &c. had or truly could determine what "all the excellencies of tragedy are, and wherein "they consist.

66

Next, shew in what ancient tragedy was defi"cient: for example, in the narrowness of its plots, "and fewness of persons; and try whether that be "not a fault in the Greek poets; and whether their "excellency was so great, when the variety was visibly so little; or whether what they did was "not very easy to do.

66

"Then make a judgment on what the English "have added to their beauties: as, for example, "not only more plot, but also new passions; as, namely, that of love, scarcely touched on by the "ancients, except in this one example of Phædra, "cited by Mr. Rymer; and in that how short they "were of Fletcher!

"Prove also that love, being an heroick passion, is "fit for tragedy, which cannot be denied, because "of the example alleged of Phædra; and how far "Shakspear has outdone them in friendship, &c.

"To return to the beginning of this enquiry; "consider if pity and terrour be enough for tragedy "to move: and I believe, upon a true definition "of tragedy, it will be found that its work extends "farther, and that it is to reform manners, by a "delightful representation of human life in great "persons, by way of dialogue. If this be true, then "not only pity and terrour are to be moved, as the

only means to bring us to virtue, but generally "love to virtue, and hatred to vice; by shewing the "rewards of one, and punishments of the other; at

least, by rendering virtue always amiable, though "it be shewn unfortunate; and vice detestable, though it be shewn triumphant.

"If, then, the encouragement of virtue and dis"couragement of vice be the proper ends of poetry "in tragedy, pity and terror, though good means, "are not the only. For all the passions, in their "turns, are to be set in a ferment; as joy, anger, "love, fear, are to be used as the poet's common

66

places; and a general concernment for the prin"cipal actors is to be raised, by making them ap

pear such in their characters, their words, and "actions, as will interest the audience in their for"tunes.

"And if, after all, in a larger sense, pity comprehends this concernment for the good, and ter"rour includes detestation for the bad, then let us "consider whether the English have not answered

"this end of tragedy as well as the ancients, or "perhaps better.

"And here Mr. Rymer's objections against these

plays are to be impartially weighed, that we may "see whether they are of weight enough to turn the "balance against our countrymen.

"'Tis evident those plays, which he arraigns, "have moved both those passions in a high degree upon the stage.

"To give the glory of this away from the poet, "and to place it upon the actors, seems unjust.

"One reason is, because whatever actors they "have found, the event has been the same; that is, "the same passions have been always moved; which "shews that there is something of force and merit "in the plays themselves, conducing to the design "of raising these two passions; and suppose them "ever to have been excellently acted, yet action only adds grace, vigour, and more life, upon the "stage; but cannot give it wholly where it is not "first. But, secondly, I dare appeal to those who "have never seen them acted, if they have not "found these two passions moved within them: "and if the general voice will carry it, Mr. Rymer's prejudice will take off his single testimony.

"This, being matter of fact, is reasonably to be "established by this appeal; as, if one man says it "is night, when the rest of the world conclude it "to be day, there needs no farther argument against him, that it is so.

"If he urge, that the general taste is depraved, "his arguments to prove this can at best but evince "that our poets took not the best way to raise those

"passions; but experience proves against him, that "those means, which they have used, have been "successful, and have produced them.

"And one reason of that success is, in my opi"nion, this; that Shakspeare and Fletcher have "written to the genius of the age and nation in "which they lived; for though nature, as he ob

jects, is the same in all places, and reason too the "same; yet the climate, the age, the disposition "of the people, to whom a poet writes, may be so "different, that what pleased the Greeks, would "not satisfy an English audience.

"And if they proceed upon a foundation of truer "reason to please the Athenians, than Shakspeare "and Fletcher to please the English, it only shews "that the Athenians were a more judicious people; "but the poet's business is certainly to please the "audience.

"Whether our English audience have been pleased "hitherto with acorns, as he calls it, or with bread, "is the next question; that is, whether the means "which Shakspeare and Fletcher have used, in their 'plays, to raise those passions before named, be "better applied to the ends by the Greek poets than "by them. And perhaps we shall not grant him "this wholly let it be yielded that a writer is not "to run down with the stream, or to please the "people by their usual methods, but rather to re"form their judgments, it still remains to prove "that our theatre needs this total reformation.

“The faults, which he has found in their design “are rather wittily aggravated in many places than "reasonably urged; and as much may be re