hardly think there ever appeared, in any learned Language, fo execrable a heap of nonfenfe, under the name of Commentaries, as hath been lately given us on a certain fatiric Poet, of the laft Age, by his Editor and Coadjutor.

I am fenfible how unjustly the very best claffical Critics have been treated. It is faid, that our great Philofopher fpoke with much contempt of the two fineft Scholars of this Age, Dr. Bentley and Bifhop Hare, for fquabbling, as he expreffed it, about an old Play-book; meaning, I fuppofe, Terence's Comedies. But this Story is unworthy of him; tho' well enough fuiting the fanatic turn of the wild Writer that relates it; fuch cenfures are amongst the follies of men immoderately given over to one Science, and ignorantly undervaluing all the reft. Those learned Critics might, and perhaps did, laugh in their turn, (tho' ftill, fure, with the fame indecency and indifcretion) at that incomparable Man, for wearing out a long Life in poring through a Telescope. Indeed, the weaknefies of Such are to be mentioned with reverence. But who can bear, without indignation, the fashionable cant of every trifling Writer, whofe infipidity paffes, with himself, for politeness, for pretending to be fhocked, forfooth, with the rude and favage air of vulgar Critics; meaning fuch as Muretus, Scaliger, Cafaubon, Salmafius, Spanheim, Bentley. When, had it not been for the deathlefs labours of fuch as thefe,

the

the western World, at the revival of Letters, had foon faln back again into a state. of ignorance and barbarity as deplorable as that from which Providence had just redeemed it.

To conclude with an obfervation of a fine Writer and great Philofopher of our own; which I would gladly bind, tho' with all honour, as a Phylactery, on the Brow of every awful Grammarian, to teach him at once, the Use, and Limits of his art: WORDS ARE THE MONEY OF FOOLS, AND THE COUN TERS OF WISE MEN.

Mr.

Mr. POPE's

PREFACE

T is not my defign to enter into a Criticifm upon this Author; tho' to do it effectually and not fuperficially, would be the best occafion that any juft Writer could take, to form the judgment and taste of our nation. For of all English Poets ShakeSpear muft be confeffed to be the fairest and fullest fubject for Criticism, and to afford the most numerous, as well as moft confpicuous inftances, both of Beauties and Faults of all forts. But this far exceeds the bounds of a Preface, the business of which is only to give an account of the fate of his Works, and the disadvantages under which they have been tranfmitted

We fhall hereby extenuate many faults which are his, and clear him from the imputation of many which are not: A defign, which tho' it can be no guide to future Criticks to do him juftice in one way, will at leaft be fufficient to prevent their doing him an injuftice in the other.

I cannot however but mention fome of his principal and characteristic Excellencies, for which (notwithstanding his defects) he is justly and univerfally ele

vated above all other Dramatick Writers. Not that this is the proper place of praising him, but because I would not omit any occafion of doing it.

If ever any Author deferved the name of an Original, it was Shakespear. Homer himself drew not his art fo immediately from the fountains of Nature, it proceeded thro' Egyptian ftrainers and channels, and came to him not without fome tincture of the learning, or fome caft of the models, of those before him. The Poetry of Shakespear was Inspiration indeed: he is not fo much an Imitator, as an Inftrument, of Nature; and 'tis not so just to say that he speaks from her, as that she speaks thro' him.

His Characters are fo much Nature herself, that 'tis a fort of injury to call them by fo diftant a name as Copies of her. Thofe of other Poets have a constant resemblance, which fhews that they receiv'd them from one another, and were but multipliers of the fame image: each picture like a mock-rainbow is but the reflexion of a reflexion. But every fingle character in Shakespear is as much an Individual, as those in Life it felf; it is as impoffible to find any two alike; and fuch as from their relation or affinity in any refpect appear most to be twins, will upon comparison be found remarkably distinct. To this life and variety of Character, we must add the wonderful prefervation of it; which is fuch throughout his Plays, that had all the Speeches been printed without the very names of the Perfons, I believe one might have apply'd them with certainty to every speaker.

The Power over our Paffions was never poffefs'd in a more eminent degree, or difplay'd in fo different. inftances. Yet all along, there is feen no labour, no pains to raise them; no preparation to guide our guefs to the effect, or be perceiv'd to lead toward it: But the heart fwells, and the tears burft out, just at the proper places: We are furpriz'd the moment we

weep;

weep; and yet upon reflection find the paffion fo juft, that we fhou'd be furpriz'd if we had not wept, and wept at that very moment.

How aftonishing is it again, that the Paffions directly oppofite to thefe, Laughter and Spleen, are no lefs at his command! that he is not more a master of the Great than of the Ridiculous in human nature; of our nobleft tenderneffes, than of our vaineft foibles ; of our strongest emotions, than of our idleft fenfations!

Nor does he only excel in the Paffions: In the coolnefs of Reflection and Reasoning he is full as admirable. His Sentiments are not only in general the most pertinent and judicious upon every fubject; but by a talent very peculiar, fomething between Penetration and Felicity, he hits upon that particular point on which the bent of each argument turns, or the force of each motive depends. This is perfectly amazing, from a Man of no education or experience in thofe great and publick scenes of life which are ufually the fubject of his thoughts: So that he feems to have known the world by Intuition, to have look'd thro human nature at one glance, and to be the only Author that gives ground for a very new opinion, That the Philofopher and even the Man of the world, may be Born, as well as the Poet.

It must be own'd that with all thefe great excellencies, he has almost as great defects; and that as he has certainly written better, fo he has perhaps written worse, than any other. But I think I can in fome meafure account for thefe defects, from feveral caufes and accidents; without which it is hard to imagine that fo large and fo enlighten'd a mind could ever have been fufceptible of them. That all these Contingencies fhould unite to his difadvantage feems to me almoft as fingularly unlucky, as that so many va