Tell, if ye faw, how came I thus, how here.

Paradife Loft, b. viii. 273

Both have finn'd! but thou

Against God only; I, 'gainft God and thee:
And to the place of judgement will return.
There with my cries importune Heav'n; that all
The fentence, from thy head remov'd, may light
On me, fole cause to thee of all this woe;
Me! Me! only juft object of his ire.

Paradife Loft, book x. 930.

Shakespear is fuperior to all other writers in delineating paffion. It is difficult to fay in what part he most excels, whether in moulding every paffion to peculiarity of character, in discovering the fentiments that proceed from various tones of paffion, or in expreffing properly every different fentiment. He impofes not upon his reader, general declamation and the false coin of unmeaning words, which the bulk of writers deal in. His fentiments are adjusted, with the greateft propriety, to the peculiar character and circumstances of the fpeaker; and the priety is not lefs perfect betwixt his fentiments and his diction. That this is no exaggeration,

pro

A

aggeration, will be evident to every one of tafte, upon comparing Shakespear with other writers, in fimilar paffages. If upon any occafion he fall below himself, it is in those scenes where paffion enters not. By endeavouring in this cafe to raise his dialogue above the style of ordinary conversation, he fometimes deviates into intricate thought and obfcure expreffion*. Sometimes, to

* Of this take the following fpecimen :

They clepe us drunkards, and with fwinish phrase
Soil our addition; and, indeed, it takes

From our atchievements, though perform'd at height,
The pith and marrow of our attribute.

So, oft it chances in particular men,

That for fome vicious mole of nature in them,
As, in their birth, (wherein they are not guilty,
Since Nature cannot chufe his origin),
By the o'ergrowth of fome complexion
Oft breaking down the pales and forts of reason;
Or by fome habit, that too much o'er-leavens
The form of plaufive manners; that these men
Carrying, I fay, the ftamp of one defect,
(Being Nature's livery, or Fortune's scar),
Their virtues elfe, be they as pure as grace,

As infinite as man may undergo,

Shall in the general cenfure take corruption
From that particular fault.

Hamlet, act 1. fc. 7.

throw

throw his language out of the familiar, he

喝

employs rhyme. But may it not in fome measure excuse Shakespear, I fhall not fay his works, that he had no pattern, in his own or in any living language, of dialogue fitted for the theatre? At the fame time, it ought not to escape obfervation, that the ftream clears in its progress, and that in his later plays he has attained the purity and perfection of dialogue; an obfervation that, with greater certainty than tradition, will direct us to arrange his plays in the order of time. This ought to be confidered by those who magnify every blemish that is difcovered in the finest genius for the drama ever the world enjoy'd. They ought also for their own fake to confider, that it is easier to discover his blemishes, which lie generally at the surface, than his beauties, of which none can have a thorough relish but those who dive deep into human nature. One thing must be evident to the meanest capacity, that where-ever paffion is to be difplay'd, Nature shows itself ftrong in him, The Mogaland

and is confpicuous by the most delicate propriety of fentiment and expreffion *.

I return to my fubject from a digreffion I cannot repent of. That perfect harmony which ought to fubfift among all the conftituent parts of a dialogue, is a beauty, not lefs rare than confpicuous. As to expreffion in particular, were I to give inftances, where, in one or other of the refpects above mentioned, it corresponds not precisely to the characters, paffions, and fentiments, I might from different authors collect volumes. Following therefore the method laid down in the chapter of fentiments, I fhall confine my citations to the groffer errors, which every writer ought to avoid.

The critics feem not perfectly to comprehend the genius of Shakespear. His plays are defective in the mechanical part, which is lefs the work of genius than of experience; and is not otherwife brought to perfection than by diligently obferving the errors of former compofitions. Shakespear excels all the ancients and moderns, in knowledge of human nature, and in unfolding even the most obfcure and refined emotions. This is a rare faculty, and of the greatest importance in a dramatic author; and it is this faculty which makes him furpass all other writers in the comic as well as tragic vein.

And,

And, first, of paffion expreffed in words flowing in an equal courfe without interruption.

In the chapter above cited, Corneille is cenfured for the impropriety of his fentiments ; and here, for the fake of truth, I am obliged to attack him a fecond time. Were I to give inftances from that author of the fault under confideration, I might copy whole tragedies; for he is not lefs faulty in this particular, than in paffing upon us his own thoughts as a spectator, instead of the genuine fentiments of paffion. Nor would a comparison betwixt him and Shakespear upon the prefent point, redound more to his honour, than the former upon the fentiments. Racine here is lefs incorrect than Corneille, though many degrees inferior to the English author. From Racine I fhall gather a few instances. The first shall be the description of the fea-monster in his Phadra, given by Theramene the companion of Hippolytus, and an eye-witnefs to the difafter. Theramene is represented in terrible agitation, which appears from the following paffage,