PREFACE, To the Letters and Poems first printed T has been so usual among modern Authors to write Prefaces, that a Man is thought rude to his Reader, who does not give him fome Account before-hand of what he is to expect in the Book. That which may make fomewhat of this kind more necefîary in my Cafe than others is, That a great part of this Collection confifts of familiar Letters, which fort of Writings fome learned Perfons among us have thought unfit to be publifh'd. It must be confefs'd, indeed, that a great Beauty of Letters does often confift in little Paffages of private Converfation, and References to particular Matters, that can be understood by none but those to whom they are written: But to draw a general Conclufion from thence, That familiar Letters can please none but those very Perfons, is to conclude against the common Experience of all the World; fince befides the great Applaufes have been given the Letters of Cicero and Pliny among the Romans; we see no Book has been better received among the Spaniards, than the Letters of Guevara, or among the French, than thofe of Voiture and Balfact Not to mention the Italians, among whom there has been hardly hardly any confiderable Man who has not publifh'd Let ters with good Succefs. What may have contributed very much to the kind Reception these things have met, is, that there is no fort of Writing fo neceffary for People to understand as this. A man may have a great deal of Wit, without being able to write Verfes or make Harangues; and may live in very good Repute, without having Occafion of doing either. But a Man can hardly live in the World without being able to write Letters. There is no ftate of Life in which a Faculty of that kind is not requifite; and there are few Days pafs, in which a Man has not occafion to make use of it. The Stile of Letters ought to be free, eafy and natural; as near approaching to familiar Converfation as poffible. The two beft Qualities in Conversation are good Humour and good Breeding; thofe Letters are therefore certainly the beft that fhew the most of thofe two Qualities. There are fome Men fo furly, fo ill-natur'd, and fo ill-bred, that tho' we can hardly deny 'em to have Wit, yet we can fay, at least, that we are forry they have it. And indeed, as their Wit is troublesom to other People, fo I can hardly imagine of what great ufe it can be to themselves. For if the end of Wit be not to render one felf agreeable, I fhall scarce envy 'em any other use they can make of it. The fecond Part of this Collection confifts of amorous Verfes. Those who are converfant with the Writings of the Ancients, will obferve a great difference between what they and the Moderns have publish'd upon this Subject. The Occafions upon which the Poems of the former are written, are fuch as happen to every Man almost that is in Love; and the Thoughts fuch, as are natural for every Man in Love to think. The Moderns, on the other hand, have fought out for Occafions that none meet with but themselves, and fill their Verses with Thoughts that are furprifing and glittering, but not tender, paffionate, or natural to a Man in Love. То To judge which of thefe two are in the right; we ought to confider the end that People propofe in writing Love-Verfes: And that I take not to be the getting Fame or Admiration from the World, but the obtaining the Love of their Mistress; and the best way I conceive to make her love you, is to convince her that you love her. Now this certainly is not to be done by forc'd Conceits, far-fetch'd Similes, and fhining Points; but by a true and lively Reprefentation of the Pains and Thoughts attending fuch a Paffion. Si vis me flere, dolendum eft Primùm ipfi tibi, tunc tua me infortunia lædent. I would as foon believe a Widow in great Grief for her Husband, because I faw her dance a Corant about his Coffin, as believe a Man in Love with his Mistress for his writing fuch Verfes, as fome great modern Wits have done upon theirs. I am fatisfied that Catullus, Tibullus, Propertius, and Ovid, were in Love with their Miftreffes while they upbraid them, quarrel with them, threaten them, and forfwear them; but I confefs I cannot believe Petrarch in Love with his, when he writes Conceits upon her Name, her Gloves, and the Place of her Birth. I know it is natural for a Lover, in Transports of Jealoufy, to treat his Mistress with all the Violence imaginable; but I cannot think it natural for a Man, who is much in Love, to amuse himself with fuch Trifles as the other. I am pleas'd with Tibullus, when he says, he could live in a Defart with his Miftrefs where never any human Footfteps appear'd, because, I doubt not but he really thinks what he fays; but I confefs I can hardly forbear laughing when Petrarch tells us, he could live without any other Suftenance than his Miftrefs's Looks. I can very eafily believe a Man may love a Woman fo well as to defire no Company but hers? but I can never believe a Man can love a Woman fo well as to have no need of Meat Meat and Drink if he may look upon her. The first is a Thought fo natural for a Lover, that there is no Man really in Love, but thinks the fame thing; the other is not the Thought of a Man in Love, but of a Man who would impose upon us with a pretended Love (and that indeed very grofly too) while he had really none at all. It would be endless to pursue this Point; and any Man who will but give himself the Trouble to compare what the Ancients and Moderns have faid upon the fame Occafions, will foon perceive the Advantage the former have over the others. I have chofen to mention Petrarch only, as being by much the most famous of all the Moderns who have written Love-verfes: And it is, indeed, the great Reputation which he has gotten, that has given Encouragement to this falfe fort of Wit in the World: for People feeing the great Credit he had, and has, indeed, to this Day, not only in Italy, but over all Europe, have fatisfied themselves with the Imitation of him, never enquiring whether the way he took was the right or not. There are no modern Writers, perhaps, who have fucceeded better in Love-verses than the English; and it is indeed just that the fairest Ladies fhould inspire the best Poets. Never was there a more copious Fancy or greater reach of Wit than what appears in Dr. Donne ; nothing can be more gallant or gentle than the Poems of Mr. Waller; nothing more gay or sprightly than those of Sir John Suckling; and nothing fuller of Variety and Learning than Mr. Cowley's. However, it may be obferv'd, that among all thefe, that Softnefs, Tenderness, and Violence of Paffion, which the Ancients thought most proper for Love-verses, is wanting; and at the fame time that we muft allow Dr. Donne to have been a very great Wit; Mr. Waller a very gallant Writer; Sir John Suckling a very gay one, and Mr. Cowley a great Genius; yet methinks I can hardly fancy any one of them to have been a very great Lover. And it grieves me that the the Ancients, who could never have handfomer Women than we have, should nevertheless be fo much more in Love than we are. But it is probable the great Reafon of this may be the Cruelty of our Ladies; for a Man must be imprudent indeed to let his Paffion take very deep root, when he has no reason to expect any fort of Return to it. And if it be fo, there ought to be a Petition made to the Fair, that they would be pleas'd fometimes to abate a little of their Rigour for the Propagation of good Verfe. I do not mean that they should confer their Favours upon none but Men of Wit, that would be too great a Confinement indeed; but that they would admit them upon the fame foot with other People; and if they please now and then to make the Experiment, I fancy they will find Entertainment enough from the very Variety of it. There are three forts of Poems that are proper for Love: Paftorals, Elegies, and Lyric Verfes; under which laft I comprehend all Songs, Odes, Sonnets, Madrigals and Stanza's. Of all these Paftoral is the loweft, and, upon that Account, perhaps moft proper for Love; fince it is the Nature of that Paffion to render the Soul foft and humble. These three forts of Poems ought to differ, not only in their Numbers, but in the Defigns, and in every Thought of them. Though we have no Difference between the Verfes of Paftoral and Elegy in the modern Languages; yet the Numbers of the firft ought to be loofer and not fo fonorous as the other; the Thoughts more fimple, more easy and more humble. The Defign ought to be the reprefenting the Life of a Shepherd, not only by talking of Sheep and Fields, but by fhowing us the Truth, Sincerity and Innocence that accompanies that fort of Life. For though I know our Mafters, Theocritus and Virgil, have not always conform'd in this Point of Innocence; Theocritus in his Daphnis, having made his Love too wanton, and Virgil, in his Alexis, plac'd his Paffion upon a Boy; yet (if we may be allow'd to cenfure thofe whom we must always reverence) |