. There appears, however, something too nice and
fastidious in the critical rule, which exacts that the hero and
heroine of the drama shall be models of virtuous perfection. In the
most interesting of the ancient plays we find this limitation
neglected, with great success; and it would have been more natural to
have brought about the catastrophe on the plan of Shakespeare and
Chaucer, than by the forced mistake in which Dryden's lovers are
involved, and the stale expedient of Cressida's killing herself, to
evince her innocence. For the superior order, and regard to the unity
of place, with which Dryden has new-modelled the scenes and entries,
he must be allowed the full praise which he claims in the preface.

In the dialogue, considered as distinct from the plot, Dryden appears
not to have availed himself fully of the treasures of his predecessor.
He has pitilessly retrenched the whole scene, in the 3d act, between
Ulysses and Achilles, full of the purest and most admirable moral
precept, expressed in the most poetical and dignified language[1].
Probably this omission arose from Dryden's desire to simplify the
plot, by leaving out the intrigues of the Grecian chiefs, and limiting
the interest to the amours of Troilus and Cressida. But he could not
be insensible to the merit of this scene, though he has supplied it by
one far inferior, in which Ulysses is introduced, using gross flattery
to the buffoon Thersites. In the latter part of the play, Dryden has
successfully exerted his own inventive powers. The quarrelling scene
between Hector and Troilus is very impressive, and no bad imitation of
that betwixt Brutus and Cassius, with which Dryden seems to have been
so much charmed, and which he has repeatedly striven to emulate. The
parting of Hector and Andromache contains some affecting passages,
some of which may be traced back to Homer; although the pathos, upon
the whole, is far inferior to that of the noted scene in the Iliad,
and destitute of the noble simplicity of the Grecian bard.

Mr Godwin has justly remarked, that the delicacy of Chaucer's ancient
tale has suffered even in the hands of Shakespeare; but in those of
Dryden it has undergone a far deeper deterioration. Whatever is coarse
and naked in Shakespeare, has been dilated into ribaldry by the poet
laureat of Charles the second; and the character of Pandarus, in
particular, is so grossly heightened, as to disgrace even the obliging
class to whom that unfortu