the Fairy Queen would notwithstanding be a Poem: But the real Difference is, that the Hiftorian is oblig'd to fet down Things as they really come to pafs; but the Poet, as I have faid, as they might or ought to happen. And this makes Poetry infinitely more Grave and Moral than History, that dealing in Generals, this in Particulars; a General Thing is that which every Man of fuch or fuch a Character neceffarily or probably ought to do or fay, which is always the juft and useful Aim of Poefy, ev'n when it imposes true Names on the Perfons it introduces. A Particular Thing is for Example, what any particular Perfon, as fuppofe Alcibiades has done or fuffer'd, or faid. And it is for this Reafon (fays Ariftotle) that Poetry is more Solid and Moral than Hiftory.

That the Philofopher and Critic gives this advantage to Poefy, will appear more juft from this Confideration, that Hiftory can inftruct no farther, than the Facts it relates give an opportunity; and as thofe Facts are Particular, it very rarely happens, that they are fuitable to thofe, who read them, and that there is not one of a thousand to whom they agree; and those to whom they do agree, have not perhaps in all their Lives two Occafions, on which they can draw any Advantage from what they have read. It is not fo with Poetry, that keeps close to Generals, and it is so much the more Inftructive and Moral, as General Things furpafs Particulars. Befides it is not the Fact that inftru&ts,but the Causes of those Facts. But those are generally, if not always kept fecret in the Breafts of Monarchs, Statesmen, and other first Movers of them: But the Poet being Mafter of his Matter advances nothing for which he does not give a very good Reafon; nor is there so much as a small Incident, of which he lays not open the Causes and Effe&s.

Thirdly, Hiftory only employs a bare Narration, Poetry makes ufe of Action, because it is an Imitation of one; and every thing is animated in Tragedy; now what is only related, or barely told to be understood, affects us

much

much lefs, than what we fee with our Eyes. Fourthly, Hiftory is cold, and as I may fay folitary; whereas Poetry joins Philofophy, Theology its felf, and makes its advantage of the Paffions.

This is fufficient to fhow that the Action imitated by Tragedy must be general, and not particular,and that it is, notwithstanding the Impofition of true Names on fome of the Dramatic Perfons, which fome Poets have done, to give their Fable the Air and Authority of Truth, by ufing known Names, yet that Influence is but narrow, fince in an Audience there are few fo well acquainted with Hiftory, as to diftinguish between the real and feign'd Names that a Poet makes ufe of; but the Fable touches equally the Ignorant and the Knowing, and therefore both the Modern and Antient Poets have often been equally the Authors of the Names, and the Fable.

Hence it is apparent, that the Poet ought to be the Author of his Subject, as much as of his Verfe, efpecially fince he imitates Actions, and is a Poet only by Imitation. He has the fame Right to this Name, when he presents us with true Incidents, provided that these true Incidents have the Poetic Qualities of Verifimilitude, and that Poffibility which is requir'd by the Art, which indeed are very rare; and therefore a Fable wholly fic titious will generally be more Poetic, as well as more eafily adapted to Nature and Art, than any that History does afford.

+

I must here admonish the Poet of one grofs Error, which most, if not all of our English Dramatic Writers have been guilty of, and that is, of the under Plots as they call them, which feldom or never are of a Piece with, and fo link'd to the main Design, as not to make the Action double, and fo destroys that, Unity, without which a juft Tragedy cannot fubfift; and this is plain from this, that you may cut off the under Plots from our Plays without the leaft naiming of the Subject. Befides, by introducing an under Plot, you distract the Attention of the Audience, and very often engage them

in

in a greater Concern for the Perfons of that,than for those of the principal Defign. The Writers, who have been guilty of this Practice,very weakly pretend,that a Play without an under Plot is too naked, too thin, to give a full Entertainment to the Audience; if that be ever true, it is because the Poet is too ignorant of Art and Nature to give a fingle Plot thofe Beauties, and those Passions, and Incidents, that should render it agreeable, nay tranfporting. But we have fufficient Proof even here of the Fallity of this Affertion, fince we find that thofe few which have no under Plot have taken more, and are much more lafting than the contrary. I need only inftance in All for Love, The Orphan, and Venice preferv'd. 'Tis true indeed, that in the last there is a miserable Farce under Plot; but then you must remember, that this Farce has been left out for many Years.

In the next Place, I defire that you would remember that Tragedy is the Imitation, not only of an entire Action, but of fuch an Action, as moves Terror and Compaffion; for if it excites any other Paffion, it is not according to our Definition, and contrary to the Defign of Tragedy; for it is certain that there can be no Tragedy, where Fear and Pity are not excited. And therefore all thofe Plays (for I will not call them Tragedies) which aim only at the railing Admiration, are excluded by Ariftotle and Reason; for that way of refining the Paffions by Admiration (which Corneille in France, and feveral in England have attempted) is not at all the Defign of juft Tragedy; for that Paffion is too foft for fuch a great Effect. Tragedy only employs Terror and Compaffion, and leaves Admiration to the Epic or Narrative Poem, to which it is more neceffary and proper, and where it has more time to act on Habitudes and Manners. Not but that the Tragic Poet makes ufe of Foy, Love, Hope, Anger, Hatred; but then it is in order from their Operation to produce the Aim of Tragedy, Fear and Pity. Thus if these Gentlemen would mean by Admiration, the Great, the Marvellous, and the

Won

Wonderful of the Tragic Incidents, we fhall eafily allow that Paffion a Place in this Poem.

Now these two Paffions of Fear and Pity, fays Ariftotle, come by furprize, when some things are produc'd by others contrary to our Expectations, as in the Oedippus of Sophocles (now to be feen in English) where the Corinthian Meffage, which feems to promise an End of the Fears of that Prince, quite contrary to our Expecta- tions, makes him entirely unhappy; but it is not every Accident that furprizes that is Tragical. For Example, the falling of a Houfe may crush a Man to Death,or the killing a Man by the random caft of a Stone; the furprize that fuch Accidents caufe is by no means proper to refine the Pasfions; because there being no fenfible Cause that produc'd them, we impute them to blind chance, nor know how to make any Application of them. But the Surprize that Tragedy requires, is that which shows several Incidents, which are produc'd of one another, contrary to the Expectation of the Audience. For the Marvellous or Wonderful is much more evident in thefe, than in fuch as happen without Defign and by Chance; because these Accidents are purely fortuitous, have not the Marvellous or Wonderful, which we find in thofe that are produc'd by foregoing Incidents. For there is nothing very wonderful in a Man's being kill'd by the fall of a Houfe, the Spectator's Mind fearches not into a Cause which is hid in the Breast of Providence, and has no other Concern for him, than what common Humanity obliges him to. But when any Surprize comes from those things which are produc'd by one another, this certainly has the Wonderful requir'd to Tragedy; for the Spirit of the Audience is ftricken and filled with the Object, he fees at the fame Time its Caufes and Effects, and 'tis from this double Prospect that the Wonderful is produc'd. Not but there are Accidents which are the Effects of Fortune, which yet feem to be conducted with the Defign of a particular Providence, as in the Fall of the Statue of Mitys on his

Mur

Murderer, inftanc'd by Ariftotle. This Mitys was an Argian, and kill'd in a Tumult, at a Public Solemnity, his Brazen Statue fell on his Murderer and flew him; tho' the Fall might be by Accident, and that it would have fal'n if he had not been under it; yet the Spectator who joins the Caufe and the Effect together, is eafily perfuaded that it was done defignedly, that is, by a Judgment from the Gods or Providence. There are many Accidents of the like Nature to be met with in Hiftory. Thus in a Modern Play call'd Lucius or The firft Chriftian King of Britain, Lucius intending to kill the Ravifher of his Mistress, kills his fuppos'd Father, yet in the midft of his Terror, finds that he has kill'd his Father's Murderer, and not his Father.

But fays Dacier, a fcruple may here arife, and that very remarkable, and that is to know whether the Poets fhould endeavour to make their Surprizes by Incidents, which have nothing of Chance in them, and which naturally proceed one from another, or whether they fhould try to produce this Surprize by Accidents which may feem to happen defignedly, and yet may be imputed to Chance or Fortune? I fhould (fays he) declare myfelf for the latter, for that feems to me much more Wonderful than the former, and it is for this Reason that OEDIPUS is the best Subject for Tragedy that ever was. For whatever happen'd to that unhappy Prince, has this Character, 'tis manag'd by Fortune, but every Body may fee, that all the Accidents have their Causes, and fall out according to the Defign of a particular Providence. But with Monfieur Dacier's Pardon, fince Ariftotle has not decided in his Favour, I am of Opinion, that the Incidents produc'd by one another, is as the lefs difficult, fo the more beautiful. However this is left entirely in the Breaft of the Poet, fince both dif cover a peculiar and happy Mastery in the Art.

The Fables or Plots of a Tragedy are divided into two Sorts, viz. Simple and Compounded, for fo are the Actions which the Fables imitate. The Simple are those

Actions