nd set
in a better Light (according to _Aristotle's_ Rules) _Homer's_, and
_Virgil's_ Beauties, or the Solidity, and Beauty of _Aristotle's_ Rules,
by the marvellous Conduct of those two great Poets. If he had Treated
of _Tragedy_, as throughly, as he has done of the _Epopoeia_, he had
left almost nothing for me to have done after him; but unfortunately, he
omitted the most difficult, which he could have Explain'd much better
than my self, had he had spare time. His Work however has done me great
Service. I have profited by the good, which others have Wrote, and must
confess, that their Faults have been useful to me. But after all, the
most excellent Commentators on the Poetick Art, are the Ancient Poems,
and as they gave the hint to make Rules, 'tis by them, that these ought
to be Explain'd. I hope, I have not followed such good Guides in vain.
If I have wander'd, by following them, without a true Understanding, I
should be very well pleased to be put in the right way, by any, who
would advise me of my Faults, or make them publickly known.

Perhaps some may Reproach me, as Mr. _Corneille_ did all the precedent
Commentators. _They have Explain'd_ Aristotle (says that great Man)
_as Grammarians, or Philosophers, and not as Poets; because they had more
of the Study, and Speculation, than Experience of the Theatre. The
Reading them may make us more Learned, but can give us no further
Insight, how we may succeed._ This Reproach is founded on this general
Maxim, _That every one ought to be believ'd in his own Art._ It seems
then, that those should not pretend to explain the Rules of Poesie, who
never yet made Poems. The Principle is true, but the Consequence is not
so, for before that is drawn, we must see to whom the Art of Poetry, and
what it produc'd, does property belong. 'Tis not Poesie it self which is
produced, for then it would have been, before it was. 'Tis Philosophy
that brought it first into play, and consequently, it belongs to
Philosophy, to give, and explain its Rules. This is so true, that
_Aristotle_ made not these Rules as a Poet, but as a Philosopher: And if
he made them as such, why may they not be explain'd that way too? And as
it was not necessary to make _Dramatick_ Poems, to give Rules to that
Art, so 'tis no more necessary that they should be made, to Explain
those Rules.

I don't know indeed, whether he who has made Pieces for the Theatre, is
so proper to explain the Rules of this Art, as he that n