[48] The same distinction is applicable to that sort of fable which is said to be the invention of Æsop. A moral, it is true, is by all critics considered as essential to such a fable. But nothing is more common, than to be led blindly by authority. Of the numerous collections I have seen, the fables that clearly inculcate a moral, make a very small part. In many fables, indeed, proper pictures of virtue and vice are exhibited: but the bulk of these collections convey no instruction, nor afford any amusement beyond what a child receives in reading an ordinary story.
[50] In Racine, tender sentiments prevail; in Corneille, grand and heroic manners. Hence clearly the preference of the former before the latter, as dramatic poets. Corneille would figure better in an heroic poem.
[52] If one can be amused with a grave discourse which promiseth much and performs nothing, he may see this subject treated by Brumoy in his _Theatre Grec._ Preliminary discourse on the origin of tragedy.
[53] See essays on the principles of morality, edit. 2. p. 291.
[55] I would not from this observation be thought to undervalue modern manners. The roughness, plainness, and impetuosity of ancient manners, may show better in an epic poem, without being better fitted for society. But without regard to this circumstance, it is the familiarity of modern manners that unqualifies them for a lofty subject. The dignity of our present manners, will be better understood in future ages when they have become ancient.
[61] Racine, in his preface to the tragedy of _Berenice_, is sensible, that simplicity is a great beauty in tragedy, but mistakes the cause. “Nothing (says he) but verisimilitude pleases in tragedy: but where is the verisimilitude, that within the compass of a day, events should be crowded which commonly are extended through months?” This is mistaking the accuracy of imitation for the probability or improbability of future events. I explain myself. The verisimilitude required in tragedy, is that the actions correspond to the manners, and the manners to nature. When this resemblance is preserved, the imitation is just, because it is a true copy of nature. But I deny that the verisimilitude of future events, meaning the probability of future events, is any rule in tragedy. A number of extraordinary events, are, it is true, seldom crowded within the compass of a day: but what seldom happens may happen; and when such events fall out, they appear not less natural than the most ordinary accidents. To make verisimilitude in the sense of probability a governing rule in tragedy, would annihilate this sort of writing altogether; for it would exclude all extraordinary events, in which the life of tragedy conflicts. It is very improbable or unlikely, pitching upon any man at random, that he will sacrifice his life and fortune for his mistress or for his country: yet when this event happens, supposing it agreeable to the character, we recognize the verisimilitude as to nature, whatever want of verisimilitude or of probability there was _a priori_ that such would be the event.