[
{"source_document": "", "creation_year": 1710, "culture": " English\n", "content": "Produced by Louise Hope, David Starner, Dave Morgan and\nthe Online Distributed Proofreading Team at\n[This e-text comes in two forms: Latin-1 and ASCII-7. Use the one that\nworks best on your text reader.\n  --In the Latin-1 version, French words like \"com\u00e9die\" have accents,\n  and \"\u00e6\" is a single letter. If you see any garbage in this paragraph\n  and can't get it to display properly, try:\n  --In the ASCII-7 version, French accents and cedillas are missing,\n  and \"ae\" is two letters.\nBoth Prefaces were printed in italic type, with roman used for emphasis,\nnames and quotations. Emphasis within quotations was again italicized.\nIn these passages, the overall italics are not marked; Roman type is\nshown between +marks+.]\n          The Augustan Reprint Society\n                Lawrence Echard\n               _Introduction by_\n  Publication Number 129\n  WILLIAM ANDREWS CLARK MEMORIAL LIBRARY\n  University of California, Los Angeles\nGENERAL EDITORS\n  George Robert Guffey, _University of California, Los Angeles_\n  Maximillian E. Novak, _University of California, Los Angeles_\n  Robert Vosper, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_\nADVISORY EDITORS\n  Richard C. Boys, _University of Michigan_\n  James L. Clifford, _Columbia University_\n  Ralph Cohen, _University of Virginia_\n  Vinton A. Dearing, _University of California, Los Angeles_\n  Arthur Friedman, _University of Chicago_\n  Louis A. Landa, _Princeton University_\n  Earl Miner, _University of California, Los Angeles_\n  Samuel H. Monk, _University of Minnesota_\n  Everett T. Moore, _University of California, Los Angeles_\n  Lawrence Clark Powell, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_\n  James Sutherland, _University College, London_\n  H. T. Swedenberg, Jr., _University of California, Los Angeles_\nCORRESPONDING SECRETARY\n  Edna C. Davis, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_\nINTRODUCTION\nPerhaps no higher praise can be paid a translator than posterity's\nacceptance of his work. Laurence Echard's _Terence's Comedies_, first\nprinted in 1694 in the dress and phraseology of Restoration comedy, has\nreceived this accolade through the mediation of no less a modern\ntranslator than Robert Graves. In 1963 Graves edited a translation of\nthree of Terence's plays. His Foreword points to the extreme difficulty\nof translating Terence, and admits his own failure-- \"It is regrettable\nthat the very terseness of his Latin makes an accurate English rendering\nread drily and flatly; as I have found to my disappointment.\" Graves's\nanswer was typically idiosyncratic. \"A\u00a0revival of Terence in English,\nmust, I\u00a0believe, be based on the translation made .\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a0. with\nfascinating vigour, by a young Cambridge student Laurence Echard\nThe Prefaces to Echard's _Terence's Comedies: Made English_ .\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a0.\n(1694) and to his _Plautus's Comedies, Amphitryon, Epidicus, and Rudens_\n(1694) are of interest for several reasons. Both of them outline the\nintentions and rationale which lie behind the translations. They also\nthrow light upon the sense of literary rivalry with French achievements\nwhich existed in some quarters in late seventeenth-century England, make\ncomments on the contemporary stage, and are valuable both as examples of\nseventeenth-century attitudes to two Classical dramatists, and as\nstatements of neoclassical dramatic theory. Finally, they are, to some\nextent, polemical pieces, aiming at the instruction of contemporary\ndramatists.\nLaurence Echard, or Eachard (1670?-1730), was a minor cleric, a\u00a0prolific\nhack, and an historian, a\u00a0typical enough confusion of functions for the\ntime. It suggests that Echard had energy, ability, and political\ncommitment, but lacked a generous patron or good fortune to take the\nplace of private means. Within the Church his success was modest: he was\ninstalled prebendary of Louth in 1697, but had to wait until 1712 before\nbecoming Archdeacon of Stow. Echard achieved the little fame by which he\nis remembered as an historical writer. Perhaps he is more accurately\ndescribed as a compiler rather than as an historian. His major works\nwere _The Roman History, from the Building of the City, to the Perfect\nSettlement of the Empire by Augustus Caesar_ .\u00a0.\u00a0. (1695-98), the\nequally comprehensive _A General Ecclesiastical History from the\nNativity of Our Blessed Saviour to the First Establishment of\nChristianity_ .\u00a0.\u00a0. (1702), his all-inclusive _The History of England\nfrom the first Entrance of Julius Caesar .\u00a0.\u00a0. to the Conclusion of the\nReign of King James the Second_ .\u00a0.\u00a0. (1707-18), and the more detailed\nbut equally long work, _The History of the Revolution, and the\nEstablishment of England in .\u00a0.\u00a0. 1688_ (1725).\nEchard's career as a publisher's jack-of-all-trades ran concurrently\nwith his life's work on history, and showed a similar taste for the\nvoluminously encyclopedic. In 1691 he graduated B.A. at Christ's\nCollege, Cambridge, and published four works under the imprint of Thomas\nSalusbury: _A\u00a0Most Complete Compendium of Geography; General and\nSpecial; Describing all the Empires, Kingdoms, and Dominions in the\nWhole World_, _An Exact Description of Ireland .\u00a0.\u00a0._, _A Description of\nFlanders .\u00a0.\u00a0._, and the _Duke of Savoy's Dominions most accurately\ndescribed_.[2] These were followed in 1692 by _The Gazetteer's or\nlater the translations of Plautus and Terence were published.\nAll of this work was clearly irrelevant to his main interests: in 1695\nhe had been urged to undertake his _General Ecclesiastical History_, and\nby that time he was already at work upon his _Roman History_\n(1695-98).[3] Into the bargain, he was in residence at Cambridge until\n1695, for he did not gain his M.A. until that year. Despite the apparent\nsuccess of his publisher's enterprises (_A\u00a0Most Complete Compendium_ was\nin its eighth edition by 1713, and _The Gazetteer's or Newsman's\nInterpreter_ reached a twelfth in 1724), little of the profit reached\nthe penurious Echard. In 1717 Archbishop Wake wrote to Addison that \"His\ncircumstances are so much worse than I thought, that if we cannot get\nsomewhat pretty considerable for Him, I\u00a0doubt He will sink under the\nweight of his debts .\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a0.\"[4]\nThe sheer quantity of work which Echard accomplished in these early\nyears is astonishing: it is no wonder that in the Preface to the\n_Plautus_ he explained that \"business\" had prevented him from\ntranslating more than three of the comedies, remarking, \".\u00a0.\u00a0. I have\ntaken somewhat less time than was necessary for the translating such an\nextraordinary difficult Author; for this requires more than double the\ntime of an _Historian_ or the like, which was as much as I cou'd allow\nmy self\" (sig.\u00a0b3).\nIn all of his work Echard sought and acknowledged the help of a whole\nseries of unnamed encouragers and authorities. For the _Plautus_ he \"had\nthe Advantage of another's doing their [i.e., \"these\"?] Plays before me;\nfrom whose Translation I had very considerable Helps .\u00a0.\u00a0.\" (sig. b4).\nApart from that aid, the _Plautus_, on the evidence offered by the\ntitle-page and the Preface, was all Echard's own. This is not the case\nwith the _Terence_, which was translated by a symposium, with the\nPreface being written by Echard on the group's behalf. As a result, its\nPreface uses \"we\" throughout where the _Plautus_ uses \"I.\" When the\nfirst edition of the _Terence_ appeared it gave the authorship as \"By\nSeveral Hands,\" but later editions are more detailed, and specify that\nthe work was done \"By Mr. Laurence Echard, and others. Revis'd and\nCorrected by Dr. Echard and Sir R. L'Estrange.\" The fourth edition also\nstated firmly in 1716, \"The PREFACE, Written by Mr. _Laurence Echard_\"\nThe only discrepancy which might seem to deny Echard's authorship of the\nPreface to the _Terence_ is the fact that the two Prefaces contradict\none another over the way in which scenes should be marked. The Preface\nto the _Terence_ simply says that exits and entrances within the acts\nare a sufficient indication that the scene has changed without numbering\nthem, \"for the _Ancients_ never had any other [method] that we know of\"\n(p.\u00a0xxii). The _Plautus_ on the other hand, numbers the scenes, and the\nPreface comments, \"I\u00a0have all the way divided the _Acts_ and _Scenes_\naccording to the true Rules of the Stage .\u00a0.\u00a0.\" (sig. b2v). Since this\nwas an open question, however, in neoclassical dramatic theory, the\nsimplest explanation is that Echard was free to do as he believed in the\n_Plautus_, which was all his own, but was, in the Preface to the\n_Terence_, expressing the views of the whole group of translators.\nThe two volumes are a testimony to Echard's remarkable industry and\nabilities. They were published the year before he took his M.A., when he\nwas only twenty-four. In the years between coming up to Cambridge in\n1687 and 1695, he found time not only to satisfy his university, and to\ndo the very considerable amount of hack work which appeared in 1691 and\n1692, as well as embarking upon his large historical works, but also\ntranslated two difficult Roman authors with great verve.\nIt would be interesting to know why, in the years between 1691 and 1694,\nEchard turned his attentions to the art of translation. The venture is a\ncurious deviation from his otherwise single-minded devotion to history\nand to journalistic enterprises (the only other translation he is known\nto have done is the brief \"Auction of the Philosophers\" in _The Works of\nLucian_ [1710-11]). The connection of Dr. John Eachard and Sir Roger\nL'Estrange may offer a slight clue. Echard was closely related to Dr.\nEachard (1636?-1697), Master of Catharine Hall, Cambridge, and author of\nthe lively dialogue, _Mr. Hobbs's State of Nature Consider'd_ (1672).[5]\nWith a family connection such as this, Echard might well have hoped for\na successful career centered on his stay at Cambridge. The dedication of\nhis _A Most Complete Compendium_ in 1691 to the Master of his own\ncollege, Dr. John Covel, suggests that he was looking in this direction.\nL'Estrange is important not only for his intimate knowledge of the\npublishing trade, but also because he was a translator in his own right.\nHis _\u00c6sop_ appeared in 1692, and he had early put out translations of\nQuevedo (1673), Cicero (1680), and Erasmus (1680), and was to go on to\ntranslate Flavius Josephus (1702). Since L'Estrange had also been a\nstudent at Cambridge, there is some possibility that the translation of\nTerence was carried out at the instigation of a Cambridge based group.\nThe translation might also be connected with the resurgence of interest\nin translation and in \"correctness\" which can be discerned in the\nThe two Prefaces differ somewhat in character. It seems clear from\nremarks made in the Preface to the _Plautus_ that it was written after\nthe _Terence_ had already reached the public and after Echard's copy for\nthe text of Plautus's three comedies was in the printer's hands. Not\nsurprisingly the later Preface is hurried, and at times almost casual.\nThe Preface to the _Terence_ is more ambitious, more carefully written,\nand more wide-ranging, though giving fewer examples of the kinds of\ntranslations made by Echard. Both Prefaces lay claim to substantially\nthe same audience. That to the _Terence_ explains that the translation\nwas undertaken in the first place because of the literary value of\nTerence's comedy. In consequence, its benefits would apply to \"most\nsorts of People, but especially for the Service it may do our _Dramatick\nPoets_.\" Secondly, the work was undertaken for \"the Honour of our own\n_Language_, into which all good Books ought to be Translated, since\n_'tis now become so Elegant, Sweet and Copious_ .\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a0.\" Thirdly, it\nmight rival the translations done in other countries, particularly those\nin France. The audience envisaged ranged from schoolboys, who would find\nthe translation less Latinate and the notes more pointed than those of\nBernard or Hoole, to \"Men of Sense and Learning,\" who ought to be\npleased to see Terence in \"modern Dress.\" As for the dramatists, Terence\nmight serve as an exemplar, especially since the translation could \"be\nread with less Trouble than the Original .\u00a0.\u00a0.\" (pp. xvii-xix). The\n_Plautus_ Preface is far less detailed, but refers back to these\nreasons, while stressing the function of the translation for the\nschoolboy. Judging by the number of editions, the _Terence_ found its\nmarket, for where the _Plautus_ ran to only two editions, the first and\nthat of 1716, the _Terence_ appeared in a seventh edition in 1729. Nor\nwas Echard's audience merely made up of students. If one of his main\ntargets was contemporary dramatists, he would have been elated to learn\nthat William Congreve owned a copy of the first edition of both\ntranslations.[7]\nThe Prefaces are perhaps a little disingenuous in acknowledging Echard's\nand his collaborators' debt to the contemporary French classical scholar\nand translator, Anne Dacier. On both occasions Echard paid her some\ntribute. What he does not mention is that the two volumes seem to be\nmodelled on her example. The _Terence_ translates the plays which had\nappeared in her _Les com\u00e9dies de T\u00e9rence_ (Paris, 1688), and it is\nsignificant that despite his claims that he wished to translate more\nthan three of Plautus' comedies, he in fact translated only those three\nwhich Mme. Dacier had already done in her _Les com\u00e9dies de Plaute_\n(Paris, 1683). Moreover, the notes and to some extent the Prefaces, are\nmodelled on the French scholar's work: Echard's notes are often directly\ndependent upon Mme. Dacier's and are exactly described by her account of\nher own volume as being \"avec de remarques et un examen de chaque\ncom\u00e9die selon les r\u00e8gles du theatre.\"\nThe views on translation put forward by the Prefaces are an intelligent\nexposition of progressive contemporary notions of the art. The belief in\nliteral translation which characterizes Jonson and Marvell in the\nearlier years of the century had been displaced by the more liberal\nconcept of \"imitation.\" Roscommon is a representative of this freer\nattitude, while Dryden's more severe theory of \"paraphrase,\" whatever\nhis practice may have been, stands somewhere between the two positions.\nLike Ozell and Gildon, and later Pope, Echard's aim, whether translating\nby himself or collectively, was to imitate the spirit of his author in\nEnglish. \"A\u00a0meer _Verbal Translation_ is not to be expected, that wou'd\nsound so horribly, and be more obscure than the Original .\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a0. We\ncouldn't have kept closer .\u00a0.\u00a0. without too much treading upon the\nAuthor's Heels, and destroying our Design of giving it an easie, _Comick\nStyle_, most agreeable to our present Times\" (_Terence's Comedies_,\np.\u00a0xx). To this end it was necessary to tone down the \"familiarity and\nbluntness in [Terence's] Discourse\" which were \"not so agreeable with\nthe Manners and Gallantry of our Times.\" This was intended to bring\nTerence up to the level of gentility for which he was credited by\ncompensating for the barbarity of Roman social manners. But the\ntranslation was willing to go further than this: it added to the Roman\ncomedy what Echard thought English comedy excelled in, \"humour\"-- \"In\nsome places we have had somewhat more of _Humour_ than the Original, to\nmake it still more agreeable to our Age .\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a0.\" (_ibid._, p.\u00a0xxii).\nWhen speaking for himself alone in the Preface to the _Plautus_,\nEchard's claims were less grandiose. Here the translation seems much\nmore specifically aimed at schoolboys, and Echard made firm claims for\nhis literalness (sig. b1-2v). On the other hand, he went out of his way\nto praise Dryden's _Amphitryon_ (1690) for the freedom it had taken with\nthe original, which, said Echard, \"may serve for one Instance of what\nImprovements our Modern Poets have made on the Ancients, when they built\nupon their Foundations\" (sig. b3v-4).\nThe praise of Dryden is to some extent double-edged since it is an\nimplicit assertion of the point made in both Prefaces, that English\nwriters had much to learn from the Roman dramatists. Echard uses the\nPrefaces to assess and compare Plautus and Terence, but he also uses\nthem as a springboard for a critique of the state of English comedy.\nLike much neoclassical criticism it is, of course, derivative. The stock\ncomparison of Plautus and Terence comes from Anne Dacier,[8] and\nEchard's footprints can be tracked in the snows of Cicero, Scaliger,\nRapin, Andr\u00e9 Dacier, the Abb\u00e9 D'Aubignac, and Dryden. Having set the\nAncients against the Moderns, Echard is able to attack the looseness of\nEnglish double plots by pointing to Terence's success within a similar\nstructure. He is also able to praise Terence's genteel style. Against\nthis, Echard admits, along with his precursors, Plautus' superiority in\npoint of _vis comica_, which he defines, interestingly, as \"_Liveliness\nof Intreague_\" (sig. a8). Echard is thus able to claim, with\nconsiderable conviction, the superiority of English comedy in several\nareas, especially in its variety, its humour, \"in some Delicacies of\n_Conversation_,\" and \"above all in _Repart\u00e9e_\" (_Terence's Comedies_,\np.\u00a0xi).\nWhat the English had to learn, in Echard's view, was \"regularity,\" that\nis, the discipline imposed upon a dramatist by observing the Unities,\nand obeying the other \"rules of the drama\" (such as the _liaisons_), in\npursuit of verisimilitude and tautness of structure. Echard's main hope\nwas that his translation and notes would correct his contemporaries'\nhabit of ignoring the Roman dramatists' \"_essential_ Beauties,\" and\n\"contenting themselves with considering the _superficial_ ones, such as\nthe _Stile_, _Language_, _Expression_, and the like, without taking much\nnotice of the Contrivance and Management, of the _Plots, Characters,\netc._\" (_Plautus_, sig. a1). The remarkable fact about Echard's\ndiscussion of these matters, despite his dependence at times upon that\narch-pedant, the Abb\u00e9 D'Aubignac,[9] is the critical intelligence with\nwhich he puts forward his argument. Unlike many neoclassical critics,\nEchard keeps his eyes fixed firmly on the strengths and weaknesses of\nRestoration comedy within the context of previous English comedy and the\nRestoration stage itself. A\u00a0sign of this is his attention to practical\ndetails, which take the form of one or two valuable notes on the theatre\nof his day. We learn, for instance, that actors were in the \"custom of\nlooking .\u00a0.\u00a0. full upon the Spectators,\" and that some members of the\nRestoration audience took printed copies into the playhouse in order to\nbe able to follow the play on the stage.[10] It is a real loss to the\nhistorian of drama and to the critic that these two volumes were\nLaurence Echard's solitary adventure into the criticism and translation\nof drama.\nUniversity of Leeds\nNOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION\n 1. _The Comedies of Terence: Echard's Translations Edited with a\n    Foreword by Robert Graves_ (London, 1963), pp. viii-ix. Graves\n    (p.\u00a0ix) says that Echard's translation of Terence was made in\n    1689, when he was only nineteen. I\u00a0have been unable to find any\n    evidence in support of this statement.\n 2. No copy of the _Duke of Savoy's Dominions_ appears to be\n    extant. It is not recorded in Wing, but appears in _The Term\n    380. This must have been much smaller than Echard's other\n    publications in this year: it cost only 3d. against the first\n 3. _A General Ecclesiastical History_ .\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a0. (London, 1702),\n 4. _The Letters of Joseph Addison_, ed. Walter Graham (Oxford,\n 5. Recently republished with an introduction by Peter Ure as No.\n    XIV (1958) in the University of Liverpool Reprints.\n 6. \"Dryden, Tonson, and Subscriptions for the 1697 _Virgil_,\"\n    _PBSA_, LVII (1963), 147-48. Raymond Havens makes a rather\n    different emphasis in his \"Changing Taste in the Eighteenth\n 7. Items 450 and 595 in _The Library of William Congreve_, ed.\n    John C. Hodges (New York, 1955). [[Project Gutenberg e-text 27606]]\n 8. _Les com\u00e9dies de Plaute_, ed. and trans. Anne Dacier (Paris,\n    1683). For a further statement of her views, see _Les com\u00e9dies de\n    T\u00e9rence_ (Paris, 1688).\n 9. In particular, see his discussion of the _liaisons_ which is\n    derived from Fran\u00e7ois H\u00e9delin, Abb\u00e9 D'Aubignac, _La practique du\n    work was translated into English as _The Whole Art of the Stage_\n10. _Plautus's Comedies_, sig. a8v; _Terence's Comedies_, p.\u00a0xiii.\nBIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE\nThe texts of this edition are reproduced from copies in the Brotherton\nLibrary, University of Leeds.\n              REMARKS at the End.\n               By Several HANDS.\n  Printed for _A. Swall_ and _T. Childe_, at the\n  _Unicorn_, at the West-End of St. _Paul_'s\n  Church-yard. 1694.\nTHE\nPREFACE.\nSince long +Prefaces+ are lately much in Fashion upon this and the\nlike Occasions, why may not we be allow'd some tolerable Liberty in\nthis kind; provided we keep close to our Author, and our own\nTranslation of him. As for our Author, wherever Learning, Wit or\nJudgment have flourish'd, this Poet has always had an extraordinary\nReputation. To mention all his Excellencies and Perfections were a\nTask too difficult for us, and perhaps for the greatest Criticks\nalive; so very few there are that perfectly understand all of 'em;\nyet we shall venture at some of the most Remarkable.\nTo begin with him in general. He was certainly the most Exact, the\nmost Elaborate, and withal the most Natural of all +Dramatick+\nPoets; His +Stile+ so neat and pure, his +Characters+ so true and\nperfect, his +Plots+ so regular and probable, and almost every thing\nso absolutely just and agreeable, that he may well seem to merit\nthat Praise which several have given him, +That he was the most\ncorrect Author in the World.+ To compare him with +Plautus+, the\nother great +Latin Comedian+, we may observe that +Plautus+ had more\nWit and Spirit, but +Terence+ more Sense and Judgment; the former's\nStile was rich and glaring, the latter's more close and even:\n+Plautus+ had the most dazelling out-side, and the most lively\nColours, but +Terence+ drew the finest Figures and Postures, and had\nthe best Design; the one pleas'd the Vulgar, but our Author the\nBetter sort of people; the former wou'd usually set his Spectators\ninto a loud Laughter, but the latter steal 'em into a sweet Smile\nthat shou'd continue from the beginning to the end of the\nRepresentation: in short, +Plautus+ was more lively and vigorous,\nand so fitter for +Action+; and +Terence+ more grave and serious,\nand so fitter for +Reading+. Tho' +Plautus+'s Beauties were very\nextraordinary, yet he had his Faults and Indecorums very frequent;\nbut +Terence+'s Excellencies (tho' possibly inferior to some of the\nothers) were more general, better dispers'd, and closer continu'd;\nand his Faults so inconsiderable, and so very few, that +Scaliger+\nsaid, +There were not three to be found throughout the Six Plays.+\nSo that our Author seems to want nothing to make him absolutely\ncompleat, but only that same +Vis Comica+ that +C\u00e6sar+ wishes he\nhad, and which +Plautus+ was Master of in such a high degree. We\nshall determine nothing between 'em, but leave 'em good Friends as\nwe found\u00a0'em.\nThis may be sufficient for our Author's Excellencies in general; for\nhis particular ones, we shall begin with his Stile, a\u00a0thing he has\nbeen admir'd for in all Ages, and truly he deserves it; for\ncertainly no one was ever more accurate, natural, and clear in his\nExpressions than he. But to be a little more particular in this\nMatter, we shall give you some few of our Author's Excellencies in\nthis kind under three or four different Heads.\nAnd first, We may observe of his +Words+, that they are generally\nnicely chosen, extreamly proper and significant; and many of 'em\ncarry so much Life and Force in 'em, that they can hardly be\nexpress'd in any other Language without great disadvantage to the\nOriginal. To instance in these following. +Qui cum ingeniis\n_conflictatur_ ejusmodi.+ +Ut animus in spe atque in timore usque\nante hac _attentus_ fuit.+ +Nisi me lactasses amantem, & falsa spe\n_produceres_.+ +_Pam._ Mi Pater. _Si._ Quid mi Pater? Quasi tu\n_hujus indigeas_ Patris.+ +Tandem ego non ill\u00e2 caream, si sit opus,\nvel totum triduum. _Par._ Hui? _Universum triduum._+ +Quam _elegans_\nformarum spectator siem.+ +Hunc comedendum & deridendum vobis\n_propino_.+\nWe shall next take notice of one or two Instances of the Shortness\nand Clearness of his Narrations; as that which +Tully+ mentions.\n+Funus interim procedit sequimur, ad Sepulchrum venimus, in ignem\nposita est, Fletur.+ Another may be that in +Phormio+. +Persuasum\nest homini, factum est, ventum est, vincimur, duxit.+\nAnother remarkable Beauty of his Stile appears in his Climaxes;\nwhere every Word is Emphatical, heightens the Sense, and adds\nconsiderably to what went before. As, +H\u00e6c verba Mehercule una falsa\nLachrymula, quam oculos terendo miser\u00e8 vix vi expresserit,\nrestinguet.+ +Quod ille unciatim vix de demenso suo, suum defraudans\ngenium, comparsit miser.+\nThe last thing we shall give any instance of, is the Softness and\nDelicacy of his Turns; of which many might be produced; but we think\nthese few may be sufficient for our purpose. +Eheu me miseram! Cur\nnon aut isth\u00e6c mihi \u00e6tas & forma est, aut tibi h\u00e6c sententia.+ +Nam\nsi ego digna hac contumelia sum maxime, at tu indignus qui faceres\ntamen.+ +Nam dum abs te absum, omnes mihi labores fuere, quos cepi,\nleves, pr\u00e6terquam tui carendum quod erat.+ +Palam beatus, ni unum\ndesit, animus qui modeste isth\u00e6c ferat.+ +Aliis, quia defit quod\namant, \u00e6gre est, tibi, quod super est, dolet.+ And as for the Purity\nof his Language in general; we find it very much commended even by\n+Tully+ himself. And +One+ of the Moderns is not at all out of the\nway when he tells us: That the +Latin+ Tongue will never be lost, as\nlong as +Terence+ may be had.\nOur Author's Excellent +Latin+ is now the greatest Cause of his\nEsteem, and makes him so much read in the World; but for certain, he\nthat reads him purely for his +Latin+ sake, does but a quarter read\nhim; for 'tis his +Characters+ and +Plots+ have so far rais'd him up\nabove the rest of the Poets, and have gain'd him so much Honour\namong the Criticks in all Ages. His +Stile+, tho' so very\nextraordinary, in a great measure may be learnt by Industry, long\nCustom, and continual Usage, and has been imitated to a high degree\nby several; and indeed this was but as rich Attire, and outward\nOrnaments to set off a more beautiful Body. But in his +Characters+\nand +Manners+ there it is that he triumphs without a Rival; and not\nonly +Dramatick+, but all other Poets must yield to him in that\nPoint. For these are drawn exactly to the Life, perfectly just,\ntruly proportionably, and fully kept up to the last; and as for\ntheir being natural, +Rapin+ says, +That no Man living had a greater\ninsight into Nature than he.+ The more a Man looks into 'em, the\nmore he must admire 'em; he'll find there not only such Beauty in\nhis +Images+, but also such excellent Precepts of +Morality+, such\nsolid Sense in each Line, such depth of Reasoning in each Period,\nand such close arguing between each Party, that he must needs\nperceive him to be a Person of strong Sense and Judgment. His\n+Deliberations+ are most compleat, where all the several Accidents,\nEvents, Dangers, Casualties, good and bad Consequences are fully\nsummed up and clearly urg'd; so are the +Answers+ of each Person as\nperfect, where every thing is so well fitted, so home, and so\nnatural, that if one shou'd study upon 'em never so long, he cou'd\nscarce find any thing more to the purpose. He had a peculiar\nHappiness at pleasing and amusing an Audience, perpetually keeping\n'em in a most even, pleasant, smiling Temper; and this is the most\ndistinguishing part of his Character from the rest of the World; his\nPleasantries were somewhat Manly, and such as reach'd beyond the\nFancy and Imagination, even to the Heart and Soul of the Audience;\nand what is more remarkable yet, one single Scene shall please a\nwhole day together; a\u00a0Secret which few or no other Poet ever found\nout.\nAnd as we have scarce found one Man in the World that equals him in\nhis Characters, so we find but very few that cou'd come up to him in\nthe Management (we mean his Art and Contrivance) of his +Plots+. We\nare sensible that many have been so foolish as to count his Plays a\n+bare Bundle of Dialogues dress'd up in a neat Stile+, and there all\nhis Excellency to consist, or at least that they are very ordinary\nand mean; but such senseless Suppositions will soon vanish upon\ngiving an Account of the Nature and Perfection of 'em. He well\nunderstood the Rules of the Stage, or rather those of +Nature+; was\nperfectly +Regular+, wonderful exact and careful in ordering each\n+Protasis+ or Entrance, +Epitasis+ or working up, +Catastasis+ or\nheighth, and +Catastrophe+ or unravelling the Plot; which last he\nwas famous for making it spring necessarily from the Incidents, and\nneatly and dextrously untying the Knot, whilst others of a grosser\nmake, would either tear, or cut it in pieces. In short (setting\naside some few things which we shall mention by and by) +Terence+\nmay serve for the best and most perfect +Model+ for our +Dramatick+\nPoets to imitate, provided they exactly observe the different\nCustoms and Manners of the +Roman+ and +English+ People; and upon\nthe same account we beg leave to be a little more particular in this\nMatter, which dispos'd us very much to this Translation.\nThe Nature of his +Plots+ was for the most part grave and solid,\nand sometimes passionate a little, resembling our Modern\n+Tragy-Comedies+; only the Comical parts were seldom so merry;\nthe Thinness and clearness of 'em somewhat resembling our Modern\n+Tragedies+, only more perfect in the latter, and not crouded\nwith too many Incidents. They were all double except the +Hecyra+,\nor +Mother-in-Law+, yet so contriv'd that one was always an\n+Under-plot+ to the other: So that he still kept perfectly to the\nfirst great Rule of the Stage, the +Unity of Action+. As for the\nsecond great Rule the +Unity of Time+ (that is, for the whole Action\nto be perform'd in the compass of a Day) he was as exact in that as\npossible, for the longest Action of any of his Plays reaches not\nEleven hours. He was no less careful in the third Rule, +The Unity\nof Place+, for 'tis plain he never shifts his Scene in any one of\nhis Plays, but keeps constantly to the same place from the beginning\nto the end. Then for the +Continuance in the Action+, he never fails\nin any one place, but every Instrument is perpetually at work in\ncarrying on their several Designs, and in them the design of the\nwhole; so that the Stage never grows cold till all is finish'd: And\nto do this the more handsomely and dextrously, he scarce ever brings\nan +Actor+ upon the Stage, but you presently know his Name and\nQuality, what part of the Intrigue he's to promote, why he came\nthere, from whence he came, why just at that time, why he goes off,\nwhere he's a going, and also what he is or ought to be doing or\ncontriving all the time he's away. His +Scenes+ are always unbroken,\nso that the Stage is never perfectly clear but between the Acts; but\nare continually joyn'd by one of the four Unions. Which according to\n+Mon. Hedelin+ are these; +Presence+, +Seeking+, +Noise+, or +Time+;\nand when the Action ceaseth (that is, upon the Stage) and the Stage\nis clear'd, an +Act+ is then finish'd. Then for +Incidents+, and the\ndue Preparation of 'em, +Terence+ was admirable: And the true and\nexact Management of +these+ is one of the most difficult parts of\n+Dramatick Poetry+. He contrives every thing in such a manner so as\nto fall out most probably and naturally, and when they are over they\nseem almost necessary; yet by his excellent Skill he so cunningly\nconceals the Events of things from his Audience, till due time, that\nthey can never foresee 'em; by this means they are so amus'd with\nthe +Actors+ Designs, that the +Poets+ is unknown to 'em, till at\nlast, being all along in the dark, they are surpriz'd most agreeably\nby something they never look'd for: And this is the most taking and\nthe most delightful part of a Play. We might insist much more\nlargely upon each of these Particulars, and upon several others, but\nat present we shall content our selves with saying that these\n+Plots+ are all so very +clear+, and +natural+, that they might very\nwell go for a Representation of a thing that had really happen'd;\nand not the meer Invention of the +Poet+.\nThere are two or three remarkable Objections against our Author\nwhich we can't but take notice of. First, 'tis said, +That he has\nnot kept to the Unity of Time in his Heautontimoreumenos, or\nSelf-Tormenter; which contains the space of two days. Then, between\nthe second and third Acts, there's an absolute failure of the\nContinuance of the Action.+ These are generally believ'd by several\nMen, and such as are famous too; and some to vindicate +Terence+ the\nbetter have added another Mistake, +That the Play was always acted\ntwo several times, the two first Acts one, and the three last\nanother.+ But 'tis plain from all Circumstances, that the +Action+\nbegan very late in the Evening, and ended betimes in the Morning (of\nwhich we have said something in our +Remarks+ at the end) so that\nthe whole cou'dn't contain above Eleven hours; but as for that of\nthe +Cessation of the Action+, 'tis answer'd two ways, either by the\nnecessity of Sleep at that Interval, and consequently no\n+Cessation+, or (which is more probable) by the Persons being busie\nat the Treat at +Chremes+'s House, that being a necessary part of\nthe main +Action+. The two following are Mr. +Dryden+'s Exceptions;\nwhere first he lays an Error to our Author's Charge in matter of\n+Time+. +In the Eunuch+ (says he) +when _Laches_ enters _Thais_'s\nHouse by mistake, between his _Exit_ and the Entrance of _Pythias_,\nwho comes to give ample Relation of the Disorder he has rais'd\nwithin, _Parmeno_ who is left upon the Stage has not above five\nLines to speak.+ In answer to this, +Pythias+ makes no such +ample\nRelation+, but rather tells him what +Disorders+ such a foolish Act\nof his was like to raise; and in truth it is not probable she shou'd\nstay above five or six Lines speaking, since after she saw her Cheat\nhad taken, she cou'dn't keep her countenance within Doors, and was\nso eager to revenge her self by laughing at the Fool without.\nBesides here's an excellent Artifice of the Poets, for had she\ntarry'd longer, +Parmeno+ might ha' been gone, and her Mirth\nqualified when she saw the good Fortune +Ch\u00e6rea+ had met withal. His\nother Exception is, that our Author's +Scenes+ are several times\nbroken. He instances in the same Play, +That _Antipho_ enters singly\nin the midst of the third Act, after _Chremes_ and _Pythias_ were\ngone off+. As for this, 'tis to be consider'd that +Scenes+ are\nunited by +Time+ as well as +Presence+; and this is a perfect +Union\nof Time+, apparent to all who understand the +Art of the Stage+. A\nlittle farther he says, +That _Dorias_ begins the fourth Act\nalone;---- She quits the Stage, and _Phedria_ enters next.+ Here\n+Dorias+ does not quit the Stage till three +Scenes+ after, as\nappears by +Pythias+, bidding her carry in such things as she had\nbrought with her from the Captain's Entertainment; but if she did,\nthere wou'd be an +Union of Time+ nevertheless, as there is in all\nother places, where the +Scenes+ seem broken. Some make this\nObjection; that in the beginning of many Scenes, two +Actors+ enter\nupon the Stage, and talk to themselves a considerable time before\nthey see or know one another; +Which+ (they say) +is neither\nprobable nor natural+. Those that object this don't consider the\ngreat Difference between our little scanty Stage, and the large\nmagnificent +Roman Theatres+. Their Stage was sixty Yards wide in\nthe Front, their Scenes so many Streets meeting together, with all\nBy-Lanes, Rows and Allies; so two +Actors+ coming down two different\nStreets or Lanes cou'dn't be seen by each other, tho' the\n+Spectators+ might see both, and sometimes if they did see each\nother they cou'dn't well distinguish Faces at sixty Yards distances.\nBesides upon several accounts it might well be suppos'd when an\n+Actor+ enters upon the Stage out of some House, he might take a\nturn or two under the +Portico's+, +Cloysters+, or the like (that\nwere usual at that time) about his Door, and take no notice of an\n+Actor+'s being on the other side the Stage.\nBut since we propose our Master as the best +Model+ for +Dramatick\nPoets+ to follow, we ought in Justice to mention such things wherein\nhe was any ways faulty, or at least where he ought not to be\nimitated. The first is, He makes his +Actors+ in some places speak\ndirectly, and immediately to the +Audience+ (of which that\n+Monologue+ of +Mysis+ in the first Act of the first Play is an\ninstance) which is contrary to the Rules of +Dramatick Poetry+, or\nrather indeed of +Nature+; and this is the only real Fault that\n+Terence+ was guilty of, as his want of +Vis Comica+ was the only\nreal Defect. His +Plots+ were not always the best for Story, tho'\nfor Contrivance, and wanted somewhat of Length and Variety, fully\nand compleatly to satisfie an Audience. Take 'em all together, they\nwere too much alike to have always their deserv'd Effect of\nsurprizing; which also gave a mighty Limitation to the Variety of\nhis +Characters+; a great pity for a Man that had such an admirable\nKnack of drawing them to the Life. It were also to be wish'd that\nhis +Monologues+ or Discourses by single Persons, were less\nfrequent, and sometimes shorter too; for tho' they are all of 'em\nfull of excellent Sence, sound Reasoning, ingenious +Deliberations+,\nand serv'd truly to carry on the main Design; yet several parts of\n'em, especially all +Narrations+, wou'd ha' been more natural as\nwell as Artificial, if told by Persons of the +Drama+ to one\nanother. Then his +Aparts+ or +Asides+ (that is when one +Actor+\nspeaks something which another that is present is suppos'd to not\nhear, tho' the Audience do) are sometimes too long to be perfectly\nnatural. Whether he has not sometimes too much Elevation of Passion,\nor Borders too nigh upon +Tragedy+ for such inferior Persons, we\nleave to others. These are the main things to be taken notice of by\nall that make use of him for a +Model+, besides all such as belong\npurely to the various Customs of Countries, and to the difference of\n+Theatres+; but those are obvious enough to all.\nBut there's still one great Objection against these +Plays+ in\ngeneral; that is, +If _Terence_'s Plays are so good as is pretended,\nwhy doesn't some Poet or other translate one or more of 'em for the\nStage, so save himself the trouble of racking his Brain for new\nMatter+. We own they wouldn't take upon our Stage; but to clear all,\nwe shall give these two Reasons: First, The Difference between the\n+Romans+ and our selves in +Customs+, +Humors+, +Manners+ and\n+Theatres+ is such, that it is impossible to adapt their Plays to\nour Stages. The +Roman+ Plots were often founded upon the exposing\nof Children, and their unexpected Delivery, on buying of Misses and\nMusick-Girls; they were chiefly pleas'd to see a covetous old Father\nneatly bubbled by his Slave of a round Sum of Money; to find the\nyoung Spark his Son (miserably in want of Cash) joyn with the Slave\nin the Intrigue, that he may get somewhat to stop his Mistress's\nMouth, whom he keeps unknown to his Father; to see a bragging\nCoxcomb wheadled and abus'd by some cunning +Parasite+; to hear a\nGlutton talk of nothing but his Belly, and the like. Our +Plots+ go\nchiefly upon variety of Love-Intrigues, Ladies Cuckolding their\nHusbands most dextrously; Gallants danger upon the same account,\nwith their escape either by witty Fetches, or hiding themselves in\ndark Holes, Closets, Beds, &c. We are all for Humour, Gallantry,\nConversation, and Courtship, and shou'dn't endure the chief Lady in\nthe Play a Mute, or to say very little, as 'twas agreeable to them:\nOur amorous Sparks love to hear the pretty Rogues prate, snap up\ntheir Gallants, and Repart\u00e9e upon 'em on all sides. We shou'dn't\nlike to have a Lady marry'd without knowing whether she gives her\nconsent or no, (a\u00a0Custom among the +Romans+) but wou'd be for\nhearing all the Courtship, all the rare and fine things that Lovers\ncan say to each other. The second Reason of their not taking upon\nthe Stage is this, tho' +Terence+'s Plays are far more +exact+,\n+natural+, +regular+, and clear than ours, and his Persons speak\nmore like themselves than generally ours do; yet (to speak\nimpartially) our Plays do plainly excel his in some Particulars.\nFirst, in the great Variety of the +Matter+ and +Incidents+ of our\n+Plots+; the Intrigues thicker and finer; the +Stories+ better,\nlonger, and more curious for the most part than his: And tho'\nthere's much confusion, huddle and precipitation in the generality\nof 'em; yet the great variety and number of +Incidents+ tho' ill\nmanag'd, will have several Charms, and be mighty diverting,\nespecially to a vulgar Audience, like the Sight of a large City at a\ndistance, where there is little of Regularity or Uniformity to be\ndiscern'd just by. Next, we do much excel +Terence+ in that which we\ncall +Humour+, that is in our +Comical Characters+, in which we have\nshewn and expos'd the several Humours, Dispositions, Natures,\nInclinations, Fancies, Irregularities, Maggots, Passions, Whims,\nFollies, Extravagancies, &c. of Men under all sorts of\nCircumstances, of all sorts of +Ranks+ and +Qualities+, of all\n+Professions+ and +Trades+, and of all +Nations+ and +Countries+, so\nadmirably, and so lively, that in this no Nation among the Ancients\nor Moderns were ever comparable to us. Lastly, Our +Comedies+ excel\nhis in some Delicacies of +Conversation+; particularly in the\nRefinedness of our +Railery+ and +Satyr+, and above all in\n+Repart\u00e9e+. Some of these things (especially when mix'd with\n+Humour+) have made many an ordinary +Plot+ take and come off well;\nand without a pretty quantity of some of 'em, our Plays wou'd go\ndown very heavily.\nSince we are accidentally fall'n into the Excellencies of our\n+Comedies+, we hope it may be pardonable if we mention also some\nprincipal Faults in 'em, which seem to need a Regulation. And first,\nOur +Poets+ seldom or never observe any of the three great +Unities\nof Action+, +Time+ and +Place+, which are great Errors; For what\nbreeds more Confusion than to have five or six main +Plots+ in a\nPlay, when the Audience can never attend to 'em? What more\nextravagant than to fancy the Actions of Weeks, Months, and Years\nrepresented in the Space of three or four Hours? Or what more\nunnatural than for the Spectators to suppose themselves now in a\nStreet, then in a Garden, by and by in a Chamber, immediately in the\nFields, then in a Street again, and never move out of their place?\nWou'dn't one swear there was Conjuration in the Case; that the\nTheatres were a sort of +Fairy Land+ where all is Inchantment,\nJuggle and Delusion? Next, our Plays are too often over-power'd with\n+Incidents+ and +Under-plots+, and our Stage as much crowded with\nsuch +Actors+, as there's little or no occasion for; especially at\none time. Then the +Matter+, and Discourse of our Plays is very\noften incoherent and impertinent as to the main Design; nothing\nbeing more common than to meet with two or three whole Scenes in a\nPlay, which wou'd have fitted any other part of the Play ev'n as\nwell as that; and perhaps any Play else. Thus some appear to swear\nout a Scene or two, others to talk bawdy a little, without any\nmanner of dependance upon the rest of the Action. But besides this\n(which is another great Error) when the +Matter+ and +Discourse+ do\nserve to carry on the main Design, commonly Persons are brought on\nto the Stage without any sort of Art, Probability, Reason or\nNecessity for their coming there; and when they have no such\nBusiness as one that comes in to give you a Song or a Jigg. They\ncome there to serve the Poets Design a little, then off they go with\nas little Reason as they came on; and that only to make way for\nother Actors, who (as they did) come only to tell the Audience\nsomething the Poet has a mind to have 'em know; and that's all their\nbusiness: And truly that's little enough. This we see frequently in\nthe chief Actor of the Play, who comes on and goes off, and the\nSpectators all the time stand staring and wondring at what they know\nnot what. Another great Fault common to many of our Plays is, that\nan Actor's +Name+, +Quality+ or +Business+ is scarce ever known till\na good while after his appearance; which must needs make the\nAudience at a great Loss, and the Play hard to be understood,\nforcing 'em to carry Books with 'em to the +Play-house+ to know who\ncomes in, and who goes out.\nThe Ancients were guilty of none of these Absurdities, and more\nespecially our Author; and indeed the Non-observance of +Rules+ has\noccasion'd the great Miscarriages of so many excellent Genius's of\nours, particularly that of the immortal +Shakespear+. Since these\nare such apparent Faults and Absurdities, and still our Beauties are\nso admirable as to cover, and almost to out-weigh our Errors (else\nour Plays were not to be endur'd) undoubtedly our +Dramatick Poets+\nby the Observance of this Author's Ways and Rules might out-do all\nthe +Ancients+ and +Moderns+ too, both at +Tragedy+ and at +Comedy+;\nfor no Nation ever had greater +Genius+'s than ours for Dramatick\nPoetry. These ha' been but little observ'd as yet, so that all our\nfine +Imitations of Nature+ may often be call'd +Lucky hits+, and\nmore by Accident than by Art. We very much need a Reformation in\nthis Case, and our Plays can never arrive to any great Perfection\nwithout it; therefore the nigher they come up to this Standard, the\nmore they will be admir'd and lov'd by all Judicious Persons,\nprovided they still keep to those Excellencies before-mention'd.\nBesides, these are as easily practicable upon ours as upon the\n+Greek+ and +Roman+ Theatres; and by a strict Observance of the\n+Unity of Place+, the Stage may be made far more handsome and\nmagnificent with less Charge; and by that of the +Unity of Action+\n(especially by the help of an Under-plot or so) the Story may be\nmade far more fine and clear with less trouble.\nBut our Nation by long Custom, and the Success of Irregular Pieces,\nseems naturally averse to all Rules; and take it very ill to have\ntheir Thoughts confin'd and shackled, and tied to the Observance of\nsuch Niceties: Therefore in the first place they tell us, That Poets\nof all Men in the World are perfectly freely, and by no means ought\nto confine their Noble Fancies to dull pedantick Rules; +For this+\n(say they) +is like taking of Bees, cutting off their Wings, and\nlaying such Flowers before 'em to make Honey as they please+. A\n+Poet+ indeed shou'd be free, and unconfin'd as Air, as to his\nThough, Fancy and Contrivance, but then his +Poetica Licentia+\nshou'dn't transport him to Madness and Extravagancy, making him\nphrensically transgress the Rules of +Reason+ and +Nature+, as well\nas +Poetry+. These that we mention are not any Man's Arbitrary\n+Rules+, but pure Nature only Methodiz'd: They never hamper a\n+Poet+'s Fancy or clip his Wings, but adorn their Thoughts, and\nregulate their Flights so as to give 'em a clearer insight into\n+Nature+, +Probability+ and +Decency+, without something of which it\nis impossible to please. And these are no more a +Confinement+ to a\n+Poet+'s Fancy, than the true Proportion of Pillars, the Regularity\nand Uniformity of Windows are to an Architect; or the exact\nImitation of Nature to a Painter: As if there could be half so much\nBeauty in Grotesque and irregular Whims, as in the due Observation\nof the Rules of Prospect, Shadows and Proportion.\nAnother Objection is, +That our Nation will never bear Rules, but\nare much better pleas'd with the ways now in practice.+ 'Tis true,\nseveral of our most irregular Plays have come off with a great deal\nof Applause, but certainly never the more for their Irregularity;\nbut because most of the Audience knew no better, being often dazzled\nby the Greatness of the Author's Genius, and the Actor's\nPerformances; and those that did, were willing to pardon the Faults\nfor the sake of some choice +Master-stroaks+ they had; and upon the\nsame account a couple of good +Scenes+ have many times carry'd off a\nvery indifferent Play: 'Tis plain that want of Use and Knowledge\nhave been the only Cause of these ways seeming so unpracticable; and\nif the middle sort of Persons were once truly brought to a Sight of\nthe Excellencies of this, and the Deformities of the other way (as\nthe well reading of these Plays wou'd in a great measure do, being\nchiefly design'd for them) they wou'd esteem of it far more than\nnow; and certainly they cou'd never pardon those many +Indecencies+,\n+Improbabilities+, +Absurdities+ that are so frequent in our Plays.\n'Tis true, there has been a considerable Regulation among many of\n'em since the Days of +Shakespear+, but not to bring things half to\nperfection. And thus Regulation has made hope for a further, as the\nAge will be brought to bear\u00a0it.\nThe last Objection is more particular: They say, +That the Unities\nof Action, Time and Place must needs take off from the great Variety\nof the Plot, and a fine Story by this means will be quite murder'd.+\n'Tis true, all +Stories+ whatsoever are not fit for a +Dramatick\nPoem+; yet there may be an excellent +Plot+ without crowding\ntogether Intrigues (little depending upon one another) of half a\ndozen couple, suppose, in one Play; without hurrying over the\nBusiness of three Months in three Hours time, or perhaps without\nskipping from Gardens to Mountains, from thence to Groves, and then\nto Town in an Act or two: But our prying, curious Sparks can't rest\nhere, but must be for peeping into Chambers, Closets, and\nWithdrawing-Rooms, ay, and into Beds too (sometimes with the Ladies\nin 'em) and have all things brought openly upon the Stage, tho'\nnever so improper, and indecent. But this Objection may yet be\nbetter answer'd by Instances; and first for the +Unity of Time+, we\nmay mention the Play call'd, +The Adventures of Five Hours+, the\nwhole +Action+ lasting no longer (much less a day, the extent\nallow'd for a +Dramatick Poem+) yet this is one of the pleasantest\n+Stories+ that ever appear'd upon our Stage, and has as much Variety\nof +Plots+ and +Intrigues+, without any thing being precipitated,\nimprobable or unnatural as to the main +Action+; so by this it\nappears that this Rule is no Spoiler or Murderer of a finer +Story+.\nThen for the +Unity of Time+ and Action too, +Ben. Johnson's Silent\nWoman+ is a remarkable Instance; an excellent +Comedy+ indeed, where\nthe +Action+ is perfectly single, and the utmost extent of the\n+Time+ exceeds not three Hours and a half (the shortest we ever\nfind) yet still the +Plot+, +Intrigues+, and above all the\n+Incidents+ are very fine, and no ways unnatural. Lastly, For all\nthree +Unities+, Mr. +Dryden's All for Love+ (tho' a\u00a0+Tragedy+, and\nsomewhat foreign to our business) is worthy to be taken notice of,\nthat being perfectly +Regular+ according to the Rules of the Stage,\nthe Scenes unbroken, the +Incidents+ exactly and duly prepar'd, and\nall things noble and beautiful, just and proportionable. This we\nreckon one of the best +Tragedies+ of our Nation. Now can any Man\njustly think that these Plays we now mention'd were ever the worse\nfor that +Regularity+ they had; or indeed have we many better in the\nNation for +Plot+; or many that have better pleas'd the generality\nof Persons than these; If so this sufficiently shows the Truth of\nwhat we offered; and withal commends our Master's great Judgment in\nthis Point: Who, in our Opinion (besides the Excellency of his\n+Characters+) plainly deserves a greater Name for his +Plots+, than\nhe does for his +Language+.\nCome we next then to our own Vindication, in which we shall briefly\nshew the +Reasons+ why we did it, and likewise what our Performances\nhave been in this Version.\nThe main +Reasons+ why we undertook it were these. First, For the\nExcellency and Usefulness of this Author in general: And\nconsequently for the benefit (as we shall shew by and by) of most\nsorts of People, but especially for the Service it may do our\n+Dramatick Poets+. Next, for the Honour of our own +Language+, into\nwhich all good Books ought to be Translated, since +'tis now become\nso Elegant, Sweet and Copious+: And indeed nothing refines, or gives\nForeigners a greater Opinion of any Language than its number of good\nTranslations; of which the +French+ is a great Instance. Thirdly,\nBecause most of our Neighbours have got it in their +Language+,\nparticularly the +French+, who have done it with good Success; and\nwe have no reason for our being out-done by any of our Neighbours,\nsince we have a +Language+ we dare set against any in the World.\nLastly, Since the Author is so excellent, we undertook it because no\nother Persons wou'd. 'Tis strange that none of our great Wits wou'd\nundertake it before, but let us Persons of Obscurity, take their\nWorks out of their Hands; when we can perceive by our little\nPerformances that our +Language+ will do it to a very high degree,\nundoubtedly better than the +French+.\nThe most considerable Objections that have been made against our\nTranslation are these. First, +What real Use or Advantage can this\nTranslation be to the Publick? As for school-Boys and Learners,\n_Bernard_'s and _Hool_'s Translations, the great number of Notes,\na\u00a0School-Master, or their own Industry will well enough teach 'em to\nconstrue it. Men of Sense and Learning, they read it wholly for the\nLatin sake; therefore a Translation is of no use to them.+ Lastly,\n+They won't fit our Stage; and consequently they are impertinent at\nbest.+ To these we answer; First, As to +School-Boys+ and\n+Learners+; +Bernard+'s and +Hool+'s Translations are very often\nfalse, mostly so obsolete, flat and unpleasant, that a Man can\nscarce read half a Page without sleeping; the latter is full of\n+Latinisms+, and both are often more obscure than the Original. The\n+Notes+ sometimes don't express the Author's Sense; and often very\nobscurely: In some things they are too short, in others too long and\ntedious: And most of them have the slight of running very nimbly\nover those Places which they are afraid they shou'd stick in.\n+School-Masters+ often want time, and now and then Judgment and\nLearning to explain things as they ought; then to leave Boys by\nthemselves to pick out the Sense of such a difficult Author as this,\nis very inconvenient; which besides the Discouragement sometimes of\nnot being able to do it, will often lead 'em into such Errors and\nMistakes, as perhaps they'll ne're get clear of. So that this will\nbe of great use even to +School-Boys+ and +Learners+: Beside the\ngreat Advantage of teaching 'em, perhaps not the worst +English+;\nand something of the Idiom of our Tongue.\nAs for the second part of the Objection, +That Men of Sense and\nLearning read it only for the Latin sake+; This is or ought to be\nlook'd upon as a great Mistake: Since +Terence+ has other and\ngreater Excellencies than his Style, as we have before shewn. But\nhowever ingenious Persons must needs receive some pleasure in seeing\nsuch excellent Latin now speak tolerable good +English+; and\nlikewise in seeing somewhat of the Conversation, Humour and Customs\nof the old +Greeks+ and +Romans+ put into a modern Dress; and\nperhaps not quite out of the Fashion. Besides, since many of these\ndo sometimes upon an occasion make use of +Notes+, 'twill be of\nequal use (in that respect) to them as to all +Learners+. And that\nthey have often need of such, will appear from the several difficult\nplaces (especially as to the Plot) and some obscure dubious Passages\nin this Author, which the utmost Skill in the +Latin+ Tongue will\nnot teach to explain; since there is as great a necessity for the\nunderstanding of the +Roman+ Customs and Theatres in this Case, and\nof the Art of the Stage, as of the +Latin+ Tongue. How extraordinary\nuseful a Translation can be in perfectly +clearing an Author+,\n+Roscommon+'s Translation of +Horace+'s +Art of Poetry+ is an\napparent Instance; which shews the Sense, Meaning, Design, &c. of\n+Horace+ better and easier than all the +Paraphrases+ and +Notes+ in\nthe World.\nThirdly, Tho' our +Translation+ will never fit our Stage, yet it may\nbe of considerable use to some of the +Dramatick Poets+; which we\nhad some respect to, when we did it; they will serve 'em (as was\nsaid before) for +Models+; and tho' many of our Poets do very well\nunderstand the Original, yet 'tis plain that some of 'em do not\nunderstand it over much. But however, it may not be wholly useless\nto those that do, and more proper for their business, being ready\nexplain'd to their hands: And upon some accounts to be read with\nless trouble than the Original: For that is in many places very\nobscure by reason of corrupted Copies, wrong Points, false Division\nof whole +Acts+ as well as +Scenes+ and the like: Further, if these\nPlays come to be frequently read by the more ordinary sort of\nPeople, they will by little and little grow more in love with, and\nmore clearly see the true Excellencies of these Rules, and these\nlively +Imitations of Nature+, which will be the greatest\nEncouragement our Poets can have to follow 'em. And besides, the\ncommon People by these +Plays+ may plainly perceive that\n+Obscenities+ and +Debaucheries+ are no ways necessary to make a\ngood +Comedy+; and the Poets themselves will be the more ready to\nblush when they see +Heathens+ so plainly out-do us +Christians+ in\ntheir +Morals+; for their principal Vices in their Plays, were\nchiefly from the Ignorance of the Times, but we have no such\npretence. This alone might ha' been a sufficient reason for our\nundertaking this Design.\nBut to come now to what we have done; 'tis not to be expected we\nshou'd wholly reach the Air of the Original; that being so peculiar,\nand the Language so different; We have imitated our Author as well\nand as nigh as the +English+ Tongue and our small Abilities wou'd\npermit; each of us joyning and consulting about every Line, not only\nfor the doing of it better, but also for the making of it all of a\npiece. We follow'd no one +Latin+ Copy by it self, because of the\ngreat Disagreements among 'em, but have taken any that seem'd\ntruest. We look'd over all the +Notes+, sometimes they would help us\na little, and often not; some hints we had from the +French+, but\nnot very many; besides we had considerable helps from other Persons\nfar above our selves, for whose Care and Pains we shall ever\nacknowledge our Gratitude. A\u00a0meer +Verbal Translation+ is not to be\nexpected, that wou'd sound so horribly, and be more obscure than the\nOriginal; but we have been faithful Observers of his Sence, and even\nof his Words too, not slipping any of consequence without something\nto answer it; nay farther, where two Words seem to be much the same,\nand perhaps not intended to be very different by the Author, we were\ncommonly so nice as to do them too; such as +Segnitia+ and\n+Socordia+, +Scire+ and +Noscere+, and the like, which is more exact\nthan most, if not all, our modern Versions. We cou'dn't have kept\ncloser (especially in this Author, which several ingenious Persons\ntold us, +Is the hardest in the World to translate+;) without too\nmuch treading upon the Author's Heels, and destroying our Design of\ngiving it an easie, +Comick Style+, most agreeable to our present\nTimes. If we have been guilty of any Fault of this nature, it seems\nto be that of keeping too close.\nBut still to be more particular; we did all we cou'd to prevent any\nof the Meaning and Grace of the best +Words+ to be lost; so that we\nwere often forc'd to search and study some time for those most\nproper, and oftentimes to express 'em by two, and sometimes by a\n+Circumlocution+: Which Madam +Dacier+ her self, as accurate as she\nis accompted, has often neglected: And thereby has wholly lost the\nForce and Beauty of many Emphatical Words. +Terence+ had some Words\ntaken in a great many several Sences, such as +Contumelia+ and\n+Injuria+, +Odiosus+, +Tristis+, &c. these we have been very careful\nabout; but where he plays upon Words (tho' never so prettily) he\nought not in some places to be imitated at all, because the Fineness\nis more lost that way, than the other; yet we try'd at several when\nthey were Natural and tolerable in +English+. As for his +Allusions+\nand the like, many of them perhaps are quite lost to us. However\nthey are commonly lost in our Language. On such places (as well as\nsome others) we made +Remarks+ or +Notes+ at the latter end; some of\nwhich we are oblig'd to the +French+ Lady for; these serving to shew\nour Author's fine Stroaks, as well as to vindicate our Translation.\nFor his +Sense+ and +Meaning+, we have taken more than ordinary care\nabout, and weigh'd all Circumstances before we fix'd. Several of the\nPassages are done contrary to the general Opinion, and some few\ndifferently from all, both as to the +Person that speaks+ as well as\nthe +Meaning+, but not without good Grounds; and if any be so nice\nin censuring, we desire that Person to shew us three +Terences+ that\nexactly agree with one another, either in Points or Words, for two\nActs together. Of those Passages that were absolutely doubtful, we\nalways took the best, and that, which seem'd to us, the most\nprobable Way and Meaning; and all such as were difficult, knotty or\nobscure in the Original, we made as plain and clear as we cou'd;\nand we presume to phansie there are very few Passages in ours,\nunintelligible to the meanest Capacity. In his +Jests+ and\n+Repartees+ (except they were +Allusions+ or the like) we hope that\nthe force of 'em is seldom lost. For making every Person speak so\nexactly like themselves (a\u00a0thing that our Author was so famous for)\nis much more difficult in +English+ by reason of its greater variety\nof +Idioms+ and +Phrases+ than in the +Latin+; and to suit these\nalways right, requires a greater +Genius+ than we can pretend to.\n+Terence+, tho' reckon'd very genteel in his Days, seems in some\nplace to have a sort of familiarity and bluntness in his Discourse,\nnot so agreeable with the Manners and Gallantry of our Times; which\nwe have mollify'd as well as we cou'd, still making the +Servants+\nsawcy enough upon occasion. In some places we have had somewhat more\nof +Humour+ than the Original, to make it still more agreeable to\nour Age; but all the while have kept so nigh our Author's +Sence+\nand +Design+, that we hope it can never be justly call'd a Fault. We\ncan't certainly tell whither +William+ the Conqueror, the +Grand\nSeignior+ (and the like) may pass with some: They may possibly\ntake 'em for Blunders in time: which are now become Proverbial\nExpressions; the first signifying only a great while ago, and\nt'other a great Man.\nAs for the Division of the +Acts+ and +Scenes+, all the common\n+Terences+ are most notoriously false: The +Acts+ are often wrong,\nbut the +Scenes+ oftener; and these have bred some obscurity in our\nAuthor's +Rules+. Madam +Dacier+ has been more exact in this than\nall others before her; yet, still she's once mistaken in her +Acts+,\nand very often in her +Scenes+. We have follow'd her as to her\n+Acts+, except one in the +Phormio+; but we have not divided the\n+Scenes+ at all by Figures, because they are of no such use; only\nthe Reader may take notice that whenever any particular +Actor+\nenters upon the Stage, or goes off, that makes a different +Scene+;\nfor the +Ancients+ never had any other that we know of. The\n+Prologues+, by the Advice of several Judicious Persons, are left\nout, as being the Meanest, the fullest of Quibbles, and the least\nIntelligible of any thing he wrote: They relating chiefly to private\nSquabbles between our +Author+ and the +Poets+ of his time: The\nParticulars of which 'tis impossible for us to understand now, and\nwe need not be much concern'd that we don't. Besides, in the main,\nthey are so much beneath the +Author+, that 'tis much question'd\nwhether they are his or no, especially the Third. The +Arguments+\nare certainly none of his, and so far from being useful, that they\nonly serve to forestall the +Plots+, and take away the Pleasure of\nsurprizing.\nLastly, That there might be nothing wanting that might make this\nTranslation as intire and clear as possible; we've all the way\nintermix'd +Notes of Explanation+, such as, +Enter+, +Exit+,\n+Asides+, and all other things of +Action+, necessary to be known,\nand constantly practis'd among our Modern +Dramatick Poets+. These\nserve extreamly to the clearing of the +Plots+ which wou'd be\nobscure without 'em; especially since their Theatres were so\ndifferent from ours. And as this sort of +Notes+ are the +shortest+,\nthat are generally us'd, so they are most +compleat+, +useful+ and\n+clear+, by the help of which any Child almost may apprehend every\nthing. Perhaps we might have omitted some of 'em, but we have better\noffend this way than the other.\nThus have we said as much as we thought requisite in Vindication of\nour Master's Honour, and of our own Undertaking. And if we had said\nten times as much; and ne're so much to the purpose, People will\nstill think, and talk what they please, and we can't help\u00a0it.\n               +Critical Remarks+\n  _Offendar maculis: quas aut incuria fudit_\n  _Aut humana parum cavit natura:_ ----\n        Horat. Art. Poet.\n  _LONDON:_\n  Printed for _Abel Swalle_ and _T. Child_ at the _Unicorn_\n  at the West-End of _S. Paul's_ Churchyard, 1694.\nTHE\nPREFACE.\nThis Nations Excellencies in +Dramatick Poetry+ have been so\nextraordinary, and our Performance both in +Tragedy+ and +Comedy+\nhave discover'd such strange +Genius+'s, that we have some reason to\nbelieve, that we have not only surpass'd our Neighbours the Moderns,\nbut likewise have excell'd our Masters the Ancients. But the want of\nKnowledge of the Ancients has been one great Reason for our setting\nour selves so very much above 'em; for tho' we have many Beauties\nwhich they wanted, yet it must be own'd, that they have more which\nwe have not, except that it may be some very few of our Pieces. But\nthen their Excellencies are far less known to us than ours; for the\nCommon People are unacquainted with their Languages, and the more\nLearned sort, for want of due Observance and Penetration, have been\nignorant enough of their essential Beauties; they, for the most\npart, contenting themselves with considering the +superficial+ ones,\nsuch as the +Stile+, +Language+, +Expression+, and the like, without\ntaking much notice of the Contrivance and Management, of the\n+Plots+, +Characters+,\u00a0&c.\nBut a considerable Discovery of these Excellencies has been made by\nmeans of a late Version of +Terence+, especially by the help of the\n+Preface+ and +Remarks+: And this has made me hope, that two or\nthree Plays of +Plautus+'s cou'd not be very unacceptable after\nthem; and since the principal Fault of the +Remarks+ in that Version\nwas their being too short, I\u00a0have made these somewhat longer and\nclearer, hoping they will prove the principal means of recommending\nthis Book to the World, even tho' the Translation had been brought\nto the utmost Perfection it was capable of: a\u00a0Thing which I dare\nnever pretend to. I\u00a0made Choice of the same three which Madam\n+Dacier+ had done before me; those being, in many respects, fitter\nfor my purpose. But before I come to Particulars in those Things,\nI\u00a0shall give some Character and Account of my Author.\n+Plautus+, if consider'd as a +Dramatick Poet+, may justly enough be\nstil'd the Prince of the +Latin Comedians+, for tho' most of 'em are\nlost, and consequently little capable of being judg'd of, yet, from\nall Circumstances, we have good reason to presume that they never\ncame up to +Plautus+; so that there is no one to stand in\ncompetition with him but +Terence+: But if +Comedy+ consists more in\n+Action+ than +Discourse+, then +Terence+ himself must be oblig'd to\ngive place to our Author; and as +Terence+ ought to be esteem'd as a\nMan who spoke admirably, +Plautus+ is to be admir'd as a\n+Comick-Poet+. The principal Differences of these two Poets have\nbeen touch'd upon in the Preface to the English +Terence+; and from\nthence it will appear, that +Plautus+ had the vaster +Genius+, and\n+Terence+ the more exquisite Judgment; and, considering what Persons\nthey copied, as the later was call'd the +Half Menander+, so the\nformer may be stil'd the +Half Aristophanes+.\n+Terence+'s Stile was generally more refin'd and pure, and withal\nmore elaborate than this Poet's; yet undoubtedly, +Plautus+ was a\nmost absolute Master of his Tongue, and in many Places there appear\nsuch a Sharpness and Liveliness of Expression, nay and such a\nNeatness and Politeness too, that is scarce to be found in\n+Terence+; and this, perhaps, may have occasion'd +Varro+ to say,\n+That if the Muses were to speak Latin, they wou'd certainly make\nuse of his very Stile+; and +Tanaquill Faber+ to call +Plautus+,\n+The very Fountain of pure Latin+. As to +Wit+ and +Raillery+,\n+Terence+ might by no means be compared to him; then he is not\nalways so happy, but often degenerates to a Meanness that +Terence+\nwou'd never have been guilty of; and tho' his +Jests+ and\n+Repartees+ were sometimes admirable, and often far above\n+Terence+'s, yet they were many times as much below him, and by\ntheir Trifling and Quibbling, appear to have been calculated for the\nMob. This, probably, made +Rapin+ observe, +That he says the best\nThings in the World, and yet very often he says the most wretched.+\nA little before he says, +_Plautus_ is ingenious in his Designs,\nhappy in his Imaginations, fruitful in his Invention; yet, that\nthere are some insipid Jests that escape from him in the Taste of\n_Horace_; and his good Sayings that make the People laugh, make\nsometimes the honester sort to pity him.+ The most remarkable Thing\nin his Stile, is the natural and unaffected +Easiness+ of it, I\u00a0mean\nin opposition to +Stiffness+, which with the true +Elegance+ and\n+Propriety+ of the +Latin+ Tongue in +Common Discourse+, seems\nalmost its distinguishing Character, and sets him above any other\n+Roman+ Author in that respect. 'Tis true, +Terence+ has all these\nExcellencies, and perhaps is more exact in +Propriety of Terms+, and\nin his Choice of +Words+, yet his extream Closeness and great\nElaborateness, I\u00a0presume, has made it somewhat less +Free+ and\n+Familiar+, or at least it wou'd be so if any other Man of less\nJudgment had managed it. So that what I mean is, that +Plautus+'s\nStile ought rather to be imitated for +Common Discourse+ than\n+Terence+'s. +Plautus+ had the Misfortune of living in a worser Age\nthan +Terence+, therefore there must be a larger Allowance for his\n+Obsolete Words+, his +Puns+, and +Quibbles+, as well as those Words\nthat were peculiar to the Theatre and his Subjects, which, if once\ntransplanted, wou'd never thrive elsewhere.\nNext, may be consider'd our Authors +Characters+; and in that point\nindeed, +Terence+ triumphs without a Rival, as was observ'd in the\n+Preface+ to that Author; and for a just and close Observance of\n+Nature+, perhaps no Man living ever excell'd him. It ought to be\nobserv'd, that +Plautus+ was somewhat poor, and made it his\nprincipal Aim to please and tickle the Common People; and since they\nwere almost always delighted with something new, strange, and\nunusual, the better to humour them, he was not only frequently\nextravagant in his +Expressions+, but likewise in his +Characters+\ntoo, and drew Men often more Vicious, more Covetous, more Foolish,\n&c. than generally they were; and this to set the People a gazing\nand wondering. With these sort of +Characters+ many of our modern\n+Comedies+ abound, which makes 'em too much degenerate into +Farce+,\nwhich seldom fail of pleasing the Mob. But our Author had not many\nof these; for a great part of 'em were very true and natural, and\nsuch as may stand the Test of the severest Judges. His two most\nremarkable +Characters+, are his +Miser+, and his +Bragadocio+; and\nthat the Reader may the more clearly understand the nature of these\n+Characters+, their Resemblance to some of ours, and their\nUnlikeness to those of +Terence+, I shall give a Translation of some\npart of 'em. First then, take the First Act of his Third Comedy\ncall'd +Aulularia+, which begins with the Old Covetous Fellow and\nhis Maid.\n  _+Euclio+ and +Staphila+._\n_Euc._ Out-a-doors, I say: Come out. I'll fetch ye out with a\nHorse-pox, for a damnable, prying, nine-ey'd Witch.\n_Sta._ Why do you misuse a poor Rogue at this rate?\n_Euc._ To make ye a poor Rogue as long as you live, like a Jade\nas you are.\n_Sta._ But why, Sir, am I thrust out-a-doors now?\n_Euc._ Must I give you an account, you hempen Bitch?---- Get you\nfrom the Door:-- that way:-- See how the Jade moves.---- Observe\nwhat you'll meet with. If I take a good Cudgel or a Whip, 'sbud,\nI\u00a0shall soon put you out o' your Snails pace.\n_Sta. softly:_] Wou'd I were hang'd out o' the way, rather than\nbe bound to serve such an old Rogue.\n_Euc._ How the Jipsey mutters to her self!---- Faith, I\u00a0shall\nspoil those damn'd eyes, then look what I'm doing if you can.--\nHuzzy, go further off:-- Further still:-- Further still:----\nStill, I\u00a0say.---- So! stand there.---- Now, you Baggage, stir\none step, move a hairs breadth, or look back i' the least till I\nspeak, and by Cocks-nowns, I'll hang y' up in an instant.-- [_To\nhimself, going off._] I ne're met with a more subtle old Hag\nthan this i' my days: I'm cursedly afraid this Witch shou'd trap\nme in my discourse, and discover the place where I've hid my\nGold: Troth, I\u00a0believe the consuming Jade has Eyes in her\nBreech.---- Now for my Gold, that has cost me such a woful deal\nof trouble, I'll go see whether that be safe as I hid\u00a0it.\n  _Exit +Euclio+._\n  _+Staphila+ alone._\nAs I live, I can't devise or imagine what Evil Genius or Madness\nhas possess'd my Master; he uses me so inhumanely; and kicks me\nout a doors ten times a day. Troth, it puzzles me strangely to\nfind out the meaning of his crazy Whims: He watches whole Nights\ntogether; and sits all day long within doors, like a lame Cobler\nupon his Stall.---- Well, considering these Plagues, and the\ndifficulty of concealing my young Mistresses Labour, now at\nhand, I\u00a0find no way but making a short cut, and hanging my self.\n  _Re-enter +Euclio+._\n_Euc._ Now I've found all well within doors, my mind's a little\nat ease.---- Now come in, and keep House.\n_Sta._ What, for fear it shou'd be stolen away? There's no\nPlunder for Thieves; there's nothing but Emptiness and Cobwebs.\n_Euc._ I'll warrant ye, I must keep a House like an Emperor for\nyour sake, you old Sorceress? Huzzy, I'll have every Cobweb\ntaken care of, and preserv'd.\nI'm very poor, I confess; but I patiently bear what the Gods lay\nupon me.---- Get ye in, and make fast the door; I'll be back\npresently. Take a special care you don't let e're a Soul come\nwithin the doors; and that they mightn't pretend an Excuse to\nborrow Fire, I'll ha' ye put it all out: If there be any now,\nout with't in an instant. If they want Water, tell 'em the Pump\nis dry; if they wou'd borrow a Knife, an Axe, a\u00a0Mortar, or a\nPestil, as Neighbours us'd to do, tell 'em the House was robb'd,\nand they're all stolen. 'Sbud, I'll ha' no body set a step\nwithin my House when I'm gone; therefore if _Good-luck_ her self\nshou'd come, I\u00a0charge ye keep her out.\n_Sta._ Troth, you needn't fear her coming; for were she at the\nThreshold, she'd ne're come\u00a0in.\n_Euc._ Hold your prating Tongue, and get ye\u00a0in.\n_Sta._ To please you, I'll do both.\n_Euc._ And besure you secure the Door with two great Bolts: I'll\nbe here instantly.\n  _Exit +Staphila+._\n  _+Euclio+ alone._\nO, I'm wretchedly perplex'd that I'm forc'd to go out a doors\nnow; and troth, it goes sore against my mind; however, 'tis upon\nsure grounds. For now's the time for our Officer to distribute\nthe Money to the Poor: Now if I shou'd be negligent, and not be\namong the Beggars, I'm afraid the World wou'd presently\nconclude, that I had got Gold at home. For 'tis n't likely such\na poor Fellow as I pretend to be, shou'd so little value Money,\nas not to be there. Notwithstanding my restless care of\nconcealing this Gold, it strangely runs in my Head, that all the\nWorld knows of it, and every body seems to be more obliging, and\nto complement me more than ever. They meet me, stay me, embrace\nme, enquire after my Health, my Welfare, and every thing.----\nWell, I'll go, and be back again as soon as possibly.\n  _Exit._\nHere we see a considerable deal of the strange Nature of this old\nmiserable Fellow; and this +Character+ he has carry'd through the\nwhole Play: But to see his Humour a little more perfectly, take part\nof the fourth Scene of the second Act; where the Servant +Strobulus+\nand the two Cooks are discoursing about this Miser.\n  _+Strobulus+ and +Congrio+._\n_Stro._ A Pumice-stone is not half so dry as that old Huncks.\n_Con._ Say ye so, introth?\n_Stro._ Take this from me. If the least Smoke shou'd chance to\nfly out of his House, he strait allarms the Town, exclaims\nagainst Heaven and Earth, that he's undone, and ruin'd for\never!---- I'll tell ye: whene're he goes to Bed he tyes a\nBladder at his Nose.\n_Con._ What for?\n_Stro._ For fear of losing part of his Soul when he's asleep.\n_Con._ And doesn't he plug up his lower Bung-hole too, lest any\nshou'd steal out that way?\n_Stro._ 'Tis civil to believe me, since I do you.\n_Con._ Why, truly, I do believe ye.\n_Stro._ Did you never hear, how it goes to the Soul of him to\npour out the Water he has once wash'd his hands\u00a0in?\n_Con._ Do'st think, Boy, we shall be able to squeeze out a\nswinging sum of Money of this old Gripes, to purchase our\nFreedom with?\n_Stro._ Troth, shou'd ye beg Hunger it self of him, the Wretch\nwou'd deny ye. Nay more; whenever he gets his Nails to be cut,\nhe carefully scrapes up all the Parings, and saves\u00a0'em.\n_Con._ Why, faith, this is the most miserable Cur upon the face\nof the Earth.---- But is he really such a pinching Wretch as you\nsay?\n_Stro._ Why t'other day a Kite chanc'd to steal a bit of\nsomething from him; this poor Devil goes strait to my _Lord\nChief Justice_'s, crying, roaring, and houling for his Warrant\nto apprehend it.---- O, I\u00a0cou'd tell ye a thousand of these\nStories, if I had leisure.\nThis is stretching of a +Character+ a degree above Nature and\nProbability; yet these sort, at first sight, will glare and dazle a\ncommon Audience, and sometimes give a superficial Pleasure to a more\njudicious one; but are carefully to be avoided by any correct\nWriter.\nHis +Miles Gloriosus+, or +Braggadocio+, is as remarkable a\n+Character+ as this, and there you may see another too in the same\nplace, one who wheadles as much as the other boasts, and plays the\nKnave as much as the other does the Fool. For the Reader's\nSatisfaction, here follows a Translation of the first Act of the\n+Miles Gloriosus+, which begins between that Blockhead and his\nBuffoon.\n  _+Pyrgopolinices+, with his Servant +Artotrogus+, and his Soldiers._\n_Pyr. to his Soldiers._] Take care to have my Buckler out-shine\nthe resplendent Sun, when the Heavens are serene; so that in the\nmidst o' the Battel, I\u00a0may dazle the Eyes of my Enemies, and\nconfound every man of 'em.---- In the mean time, I'll comfort my\nbold _Bilbo_, that he might n't be dull and melancholly for want\nof use this long time; for the poor Rogue is damnably eager to\nslice all my Foes, and make a Hash of 'em.---- But where's\n_Artotrogus_?\n_Art._ Here, an't like your Honour, ready to wait upon a Man o'\nthe greatest Fortitude and Fortune i' th' Universe, and o' the\nmost majestick Air; then for personal Valour, Lord, _Mars_\nhimself dare n't pretend to measure Swords with you.\n_Pyr._ You mean him in the spatious _Gurgustidonian_ Plains, the\nmighty Generalissimo, _Bombomachides-- Cluninstaridy--\nSarchides_, great _Neptune_'s Grand-child?----\n_Art._ ----The same, Sir. Him with the golden Armour, whose\nwhole Army you blew away with a single Puff, like Leaves before\nthe Wind, and Feathers in a Storm.\n_Pyr._ By _Hercules_, 'twas nothing.\n_Art._ No, faith, Sir, nothing at all to what I can relate,----\n[_Aside_] but the Devil a bit of Truth's in't. If any Man can\nshew me a greater Lyer, or a more bragging Coxcomb than this\nBlunderbuss, he shall take me, make me his Slave, and starve me\nwith Whey and Butter-milk-- Well, Sir?\n_Pyr._ Where are you?\n_Art._ Here, Sir:---- Wonderful! how you broke the great\n_Indian_ Elephants Arm with your single Fist?\n_Pyr._ What Arm?\n_Art._ I wou'd ha' said Thigh.\n_Pyr._ Pshaw, I did that with ease.\n_Art._ By _Jove_, Sir, had you us'd your full Strength, you'd\nha' flead, gutted, and bon'd the huge Beast at once.\n_Pyr._ I wou'd not ha' ye relate all my Acts at this time.\n_Art._ Really, Sir, 'tis impossible to innumerate all your noble\nActs that I have been Spectator of.---- [_Aside._] 'Tis this\nBelly of mine creates me all this Plagues. My Ears must bear\nthis Burden, for fear my Teeth shou'd want Work; and to every\nLye he tells, I\u00a0must swear\u00a0to.\n_Pyr._ What was I going to say?------\n_Art._ O, Sir, I know your meaning.---- 'Twas a noble Exploit;\nI\u00a0remember't very well.\n_Pyr._ What was't?\n_Art._ Whatever you perform'd, was so.\n_Pyr._ Ha' ye a Table-Book here?\n_Art._ D'ye want one, Sir?---- Here's a Pencil too.\n_Pyr._ Thou'st ingeniously accommodated thy Sentiments to mine.\n_Art._ O, 'tis my Duty to adapt my Manners to your Nod, and\nalways keep 'em within the compass of your Commands.\n_Pyr._ Well, how many can you remember?\n_Art._ I remember a hundred and fifty _Cilicians_, a hundred\n_Sycolatronideans_, thirty _Sardeans_, and threescore\n_Macedonians_, you slew in one day.\n_Pyr._ And how many are there in all?\n_Art._ Seven thousand.\n_Pyr._ That's right. You're an excellent Arithmetician.\n_Art._ I have 'em _in capite_, tho' not in black and white.\n_Pyr._ Truly, a prodigious Memory!\n_Art._ That's owing to your Table.\n_Pyr._ As long as you proclaim my Honour, you shall never want\neating: my Table shall be always free to receive\u00a0ye.\n_Art._ Then in _Cappadocia_, Sir, where you wou'd ha' certainly\ncut off five hundred Men, had not your Sword been a little\nblunt; and those but the Relicts of the Infantry you had just\ndefeated,---- [_Aside_] if there were any such in being.---- But\nwhy shou'd I mention these things, when the whole World knows\nhow much the mighty _Pyrgopolinices_ excels the rest of Mortals\nin Valour, Beauty, and Renown'd Exploits. All the Ladies in Town\nare ready to run mad for ye; troth, and all the reason i'the\nWorld for't, since you've so charming a Countenance. As\nyesterday, some of 'em catch'd me by the Cloak, and----\n_Pyr._ Prithee, what did they say o'\u00a0me? [_Smiling._\n_Art._ They fell to questioning: _Prithee_, says one, _is n't\nthis the stout +Achillis?+ His Brother indeed_, quoth I. _Let me\ndye_, says another, _if he be n't a wonderful handsome Man, how\nnobly he looks, and how gracefully he wears his Hair! What a\nprodigious Happiness 'tis to be his Bed-fellow!_\n_Pyr._ Said she so, i' faith? [_Laughing._\n_Art._ And more than that, begg'd of me, for God's sake, to get\nye to pass that way, that they might see how triumphantly you\nmarch'd along.\n_Pyr._ This same extraordinary Beauty brings a Man to\nextraordinary Inconveniencies.\n_Art._ Well, strangely importunate they were, they nothing but\nbegg'd, pray'd, and conjur'd me to bless 'em with a sight of ye;\nnay, they sent for me so often, that I was sometimes forc'd to\nneglect your Business.\n_Pyr._ I think 'tis high time to be marching to the Piazza, and\npay off the Soldiers I listed yesterday; for the King was very\nearnest with me to do him the favour of raising him some new\nLevies. This day have I appointed to pay him a Visit.\n_Art._ Let's be marching then.\n_Pyr._ Guards, follow your Leader.\n  _Exeunt omnes._\nI need not make many Reflections upon this Scene; but for the\nclearer perceiving of it, let us bring it to the Touch-stone of\nNature, that is, compare it with Terence, and shew how modestly he\nhas manag'd the same +Subject+ and +Characters+, to wit, his\n+Thraso+ and +Gnatho+, in the beginning of the third Act of his\n+Eunuch+.\n  _+Thraso+ and +Gnatho+._\n_Thra._ Was the Lady so extremely thankful?\n_Gna._ O, vastly, Sir.\n_Thra._ And wonderfully pleas'd, say\u00a0ye?\n_Gna._ Really, Sir, not so much for the present as the honorable\nPerson who bestow'd it; and for that, Sir, she triumphs above\nmeasure.\n_Thra._ Truly, 'tis my peculiar Fortune, to have every thing I\ndo most gratefully receiv'd.\n_Gna._ Faith, Sir, I've observ'd as much.\n_Thra._ Why the King of _Persia_, whenever I did him a Kindness,\nwas extremely sensible of it: He was n't so to others.\n_Gna._ A smart Tongue so well hung as yours, Sir, can obtain\nthat Glory with Ease which cost others so much Toil and Labour.\n_Thra._ Right.\n_Gna._ The Monarch has you in his Eye then?\n_Thra._ Right again.\n_Gna._ And wears you next his heart?\n_Thra._ Very true: And trusts all his Army and Secrets to my\nDiscretion.\n_Gna._ Prodigious!\n_Thra._ Then if he happen'd to be tir'd with Company, or\nfateagu'd with Business, and was desirous of Ease,---- as\ntho',---- you know what I mean.\n_Gna._ Yes, Sir:------ As tho, when he had a mind to clear his\nStomach, as a Man may say, of all Concerns,------\n_Thra._ Right: Then was I his only Companion hand to fist.\n_Gna._ Ay marry Sir! This is a Monarch indeed.\n_Thra._ Oh! he's a Man of a thousand.\n_Gna._ Yes, one of a million, if he chose you for his Companion.\n_Thra._ All the Officers envy'd me, and grumbl'd at me behind my\nback; but I valued it not: They envy'd me intolerably: But above\nall, one who had the Charge o' the vast _Indian_ Elephants. One\nday, this Fellow being more turbulent than the rest, I\u00a0snap'd\nhim up; _Prithee Strato_, said I, _why art thou so fierce? Is't\nbecause you're Lord o' the wild beasts?_\n_Gna._ Neatly said, as I hope to live; and shrewdly. Bless me!\nyou overthrow Man and Beast.---- What said he, Sir?\n_Thra._ Not a word.\n_Gna._ Nay, I can't tell how he shou'd.\n_Thra._ But, _Gnatho_, did I never tell you how sharp I was upon\na young _Rhodian_ Spark at a Feast?\n_Gna._ Never, Sir; let's hear't, by all means.-- He has told it\nme a thousand times. [_Aside._\n_Thra._ Why this _Rhodian_ Spark I told ye of, was with me at a\nFeast, where I happen'd to have a small Girl: This Stripling\nbegan to be sweet upon her, and waggish upon me too. _How now,\nyou impudent Saucebox_, said I; _you're Man's meat your self,\nand yet have a mind to a Tid-bit._\n_Gna._ Ha, ha, he.\n_Thra._ What's the matter, hah?\n_Gna._ Very fine, sharp, and delicate; that cou'd not be mended.\nBut pray, Sir, was this your own? I\u00a0took it for an old Jest.\n_Thra._ Did you ever hear't before?\n_Gna._ Often, Sir; and it takes to a miracle.\n_Thra._ They're oblig'd to me for't.\n_Gna._ I'm sorry tho', you were so sharp upon the foolish young\nGentleman. But pray, Sir, what did he say then?\n_Thra._ He was quite dash'd out of Countenance; and the whole\nCompany ready to dye with laughing. After that, every body stood\nin great awe of\u00a0me.\n_Gna._ And truly they had reason.\nHere may be seen +Bragging+ and +Wheadling+ sufficiently, but still\nNature closely observ'd, and all its due proportions; whereas the\nother has too much out-gone Probability, and strain'd his\n+Characters+ to an extravagant pitch. I\u00a0shall not criticise upon the\nParticulars, but leave the Reader to judge their Differences; but\nonly I may observe, that when +Characters+ are carry'd too high, as\nmany of ours are, they may probably make an Audience laugh very\nheartily, but can give 'em but small Pleasure; whereas others will\ngive 'em great Delight, tho' less Laughter.\nI am afraid I have dwelt too long upon this Subject, therefore I\npass on to our Author's +Plots+. In that respect, he had not often\nthat +Art+ and +Management+ that +Terence+ had, nor in all his Plays\nwas so +regular+ as he; tho' in several he was, particularly in\nthose I have chosen. But then his Scenes were commonly less\nlanguishing, his +Incidents+ more surprizing, and his +Surprizes+\nmore admirable; undoubtedly he had more of the +Vis comica+, which I\nmay translate +Liveliness of Intreague+, than +Terence+. His\n+Subjects+ were all more +Simple+ than the other's, but I am apt to\nbelieve, that will be reckon'd but a very small Commendation in our\nNation, who are but little Lovers of such thin Dyet, as they call\nit. His +Narrations+ are more lively and sharp than those of\n+Terence+'s, and, I\u00a0think, every whit as natural and as well brought\nin: I'm sure in some of 'em he can never be out-done as to his way\nof bringing of 'em in. As for the General Rules of the Stage,\nI\u00a0refer the Reader to the Preface to +Terence+.\nOur Author's principal Fault was, his mixing the +Representation+\nwith the +Theatral Action+ in many places, where he often makes his\nActors speak immediately and directly to the Spectators; a\u00a0Fault\nthat +Terence+ was not wholly free from. This our modern Plays,\nI\u00a0think, are never guilty of; only in our +Monologues+ and +Asides+,\nour Actors have got a custom of looking so full upon the Spectators,\nthat it seems but one degree better. But our Author is not guilty of\nthis in these three Plays, except in +Amphitryon+, and that by way\nof +Prologue+, or of any other Faults but what, I\u00a0believe, I\u00a0have\nshewn in my +Remarks+. And these that I have here chosen, are no\nways inferior to +Terence+'s in matters of +Plot+ and +Intreague+,\nbut in some respects superior, tho' not so elaborately wrought up,\nor always with that Niceness; so that these may undoubtedly prove\nexcellent Models for our Poets Imitation, provided they observe\nDifferences of Tastes, Humours, Ages, and Persons, and keep to those\nprincipal Beauties they already possess, some of which are\nundoubtedly above the Ancients. Only +Terence+ will teach 'em one\nthing that +Plautus+ does not, to wit, the great Cunning of working\nin +Under-Plots+, and still preserving the +Unity of Action+; for\n+Plautus+ has none of them. As for the Necessity of Rules, the\nObjections against 'em, and the wonderful Perfection our Plays might\narrive to by a more close Observance of 'em, I\u00a0must once more refer\nmy Reader to the Preface to +Terence+. It was principally upon the\nPoets Account, and for all such as are desirous of understanding and\njudging the Excellencies of Dramatick Poetry, that I translated\nthese Plays. If it be objected, that the Poets, Criticks, and\nLovers, as well as Judges of Dramatick Poetry, do most of 'em\nunderstand the Original; I\u00a0must deny the Truth of it, tho' several\nof 'em do: But if they did, these will be much more proper for their\nDesign, especially by means of the +Notes+ and +Remarks+; and the\nReasons I urg'd for the translation of +Terence+, bear a greater\nforce in this Author, for here is a greater Obscurity, by reason of\ncorrupted Copies, wrong Points, false Divisions of whole Acts as\nwell as Scenes, besides a greater number of knotty and obscure\nPassages, than in +Terence+.\nTho' this was my principal, it was not my only Design of translating\nthis Author, for I had all the way an Eye to School boys, and\nLearners of the +Latin+ Tongue: Therefore, upon that account, I\u00a0have\nnot only kept perfectly close to his Sence, but almost always to his\nWords too; a\u00a0thing not only extream difficult in an Author so\nfrequently verbose, but oftentimes dangerous too: And for an\nInstance, I\u00a0need not go any further than the very first Sentence of\nthe +Prologue+ to +Amphitryon+, which if I had made shorter, I\u00a0cou'd\nhave made better. I\u00a0can't forbear mentioning a Passage in the third\nAct of the same Play, which just now comes to my remembrance:\n  Nam certo si sis sanus, aut sapias satis,\n  Quam tu impudicam esse arbitrare, & pr\u00e6dicas,\n  Cum ea tu sermonem nec joco, nec serio\n  Tibi habeas, nisi sis stultior stultissimo.\nWhich I have translated, perhaps, too closely thus; +I'm sure, had\nye either Wit, or Discretion, or weren't the greatest Fool in\nNature, you'd ne'er hold Discourse, either in Mirth or Earnest, with\nthe Woman you believe and declare a Strumpet.+ I'm confident many\nother Translators wou'd not have been so scrupulously nice, but have\nmade shorter work of it. But I have not only been so scrupulous in\nthis Case, but I have likewise imitated all his Faults and\nImperfections, whenever I cou'd do it without extream Injury to the\nTranslation; I\u00a0speak of his +Puns+, +Quibbles+, +Rhimes+, +Gingles+,\nand his several ways of playing upon words; which indeed were the\nFaults of his Age, as it was of ours in +Shakespear+'s and\n+Johnson+'s days, and of which +Terence+, as correct as he is, is\nnot perfectly clear. Our Author's playing upon words are of that\nvarious nature, and so frequent too, I\u00a0need not go far for a single\nInstance, which shall be in the fore part of the Prologue to\n+Amphitryon+:\n  Justam rem & facilem esse oratum \u00e0 vobis volo.\n  Nam juste ab justis sum orator datus.\n  Nam injusta ab justis impetrare non decet:\n  Justa autem ab injustis petere, insipientia\u00a0'st:\n  Quippe illi iniqui jus ignorant, neque tenent.\nWhich I have translated thus: +I desire nothing but what's\nreasonable, and feasible; for 'tis a reasonable God requires Reason\nfrom a reasonable People; but to require Roguery from reasonable\nPeople, is base; and to expect Reason from Rascals, is nonsence;\nsince such People neither know Reason nor observe it.+ Our Author's\nWit did many times consist in his playing upon Words; a\u00a0great pity\nindeed, for a person who was so well able to writ after a more\nsubstantial way, of which we have many remarkable Instances. Besides\nhis Quibbling, partly from his Carelesness and Necessities, he hath\nsometimes a vein of +Trifling+, which was but very indifferent; and\non those places the Reader must make some allowance for the\ntranslation, and not expect more than the Matter will well bear. As\nfor our Author's +Jests+ and +Repartees+, for what we know of 'em,\nI\u00a0took a particular care in preserving their Force; and for the most\npart, I\u00a0presume, I\u00a0have done it in a great measure, sometimes by a\nlucky hit; or a peculiar happiness of our Tongue, other times by a\nlittle Liberty taken, and when all have fail'd, the +Remarks+ have\ngenerally supply'd the Defect, a\u00a0way I was forc'd to content my self\nwithal in many places; the worse they were, they were frequently\nmore difficult to preserve, therefore I thought it as well to slur\nover some few of the meaner sort. Several of his +Jests+ and bits of\n+Satyr+ are undoubtedly lost to us, not only in respect of our\nLanguage, but also our Knowledge, and this sometimes makes his\n+Sence+ a little obscure. And as the +Sence+ of an Author ought to\nbe his Translator's chiefest Care, so it has been mine; and tho'\nI\u00a0cannot affirm, that I have kept to it in every passage, yet I\nbelieve I have often done it where a common Reader will think I have\nnot; and I think it no commendation to my self to say I have hit it\non many places where the Common Interpreters have missed.\nAfter all, I dare not pretend to say, that this Translation equals\nthe Original, for there is such a peculiar Air in this Author as\nwell as +Terence+, that our Tongue seems uncapable of, or at least\nit does so to me. Yet still if 'twere always read with the Original,\nit wou'd make far more for me than otherwise. In short, the Reader\nought to look upon this as a Translation of an Author who had\nseveral Faults, and such places, as the +English+ must of necessity\nappear mean, being little better in the Original; and likewise as an\nAuthor of Antiquity, some of whose Customs and Manners will appear a\nlittle uncouth and unsightly, in spight of all a Translator's Care.\nI\u00a0endeavour'd to be as like my Author as I cou'd, especially in that\nwhich I reckon his distinguishing Character, to wit, the natural and\nunaffected easiness of his Stile, and as this seems the most capable\nof imitation, so I believe I have been more successful in this\nParticular than in any other: and that is the main Reason I have had\nso many Abbreviations, to make it appear still more like common\nDiscourse, and the usual way of speaking. Perhaps I may be thought\nto have been too bold in that point, because I have had some that\nare not usual in Prose; therefore I don't set this way as a Copy for\nany one to follow me in, nor shall I use it myself in any other\nPiece. I\u00a0have all the way divided the +Acts+ and +Scenes+ according\nto the true Rules of the Stage, which are extreamly false in all the\nEditions of this Author, especially the +Scenes+.\nTo make this Translation the most useful that I cou'd, I\u00a0have made\n+Remarks+ upon each Play, and those are of two sorts, tho' equally\nintermix'd: The first, to shew the Author's chief Excellencies as to\nhis Contrivance and Management of his +Plots+ and +Incidents+; the\nsecond, to discover several Beauties of +Stile+ and +Wit+,\nprincipally such as are not very clear, or cannot well be preserv'd\nin our Tongue; and those are likewise to vindicate my Translation.\nSeveral of these I must own my self oblig'd to Madam +Dacier+ for,\nor at least the hint, tho' some of 'em I cou'd not have miss'd of in\nthe prosecution of those Designs I aim'd at. I\u00a0have borrow'd little\nor nothing from any other, for her's are far the best +Notes+ I ever\nmet with, tho' many of 'em were done more to shew her Parts and\nReading than for any real use, a\u00a0thing which I shall never aim at.\nI\u00a0have been forc'd in most of 'em to be extream nice and curious in\npenetrating into the bottom of the Author, for I find it far more\ndifficult to discover a Beauty than a Fault. I\u00a0might have enlarg'd\nupon 'em, and have made several more, with good grounds, but I\nthought it dangerous to say all that cou'd be said; but instead of\nthat I was forc'd, much against my will, to dash out several of\nthose upon +Amphitryon+ upon the account of the Printer, but the\nrest are more full and compleat.\nIf business wou'd have permitted me, I\u00a0shou'd have ventur'd upon\nthree more of our Authors Plays; and upon that Account, I\u00a0have taken\nsomewhat less time than was necessary for the translating such an\nextraordinary difficult Author; for this requires more than double\nthe time of a +Historian+ or the like, which was as much as I cou'd\nallow my self. I\u00a0made choice of these three Plays as well for their\n+Modesty+ as +Regularity+, for above all things I wou'd by no means\ngive the least Encouragement to Lewdness or Obscenity, which grow\ntoo fast of themselves; and therefore I thought I cou'd not chuse\nbetter than after a Lady. +Amphitryon+ had the Name, and never\nfail'd of a general Approbation; +Epidicus+ was our Author's\nFavourite, and truly there is much Art in it, tho' it is a little\nheavy; and +Rudens+ is in several respects a better Play than any of\n+Plautus+'s or +Terence+'s. I'm afraid +Amphitryon+ will bear the\nworse in our Tongue, upon the Account of Mr. +Dryden+'s, whose\nImprovements are very extraordinary; but considering Mr. +Dryden+'s\nManagement is of such a different Nature, this will still be as\nuseful and as proper for my +Design+, or at least to School-boys and\nLearners. I\u00a0must do that great Man the Justice in saying, that he\nhas not only much improved the +Humour+, +Wit+, and +Design+ in many\nplaces, but likewise the +Thoughts+. I'll mention one, which just\nnow comes into my mind. +Alcmena+ in the Second Act complains thus:\n+How poor and short are this Life's Pleasures, if once compar'd with\nthe Sorrows we endure? 'Tis Man's Destiny, and Heaven's Pleasure, to\nmix our Joys with bitter Potions; and for some few Hours of\nSatisfaction, we meet with Ages of Ills and Troubles.+ Mr. +Dryden+,\nby the help of Blank Verse, and a little more room, has better'd it\nextreamly.\n  Ye niggard Gods! you make our Lives too long:\n  You fill 'em with Diseases, Wants, and Woes,\n  And only dash 'em with a little Love;\n  Sprinkled by Fits, and with a sparing Hand.\n  Count all our Joys, from Childhood ev'n to Age,\n  They wou'd but make a Day of ev'ry Year:\nAnd to carry it on further yet, and to make it appear more fine and\nclear, he says,\n  Take back your Sev'nty Years, (the stint of Life)\n  Or else be kind, and cram the Quintessence\n  Of Sev'nty Years into sweet Sev'nty Days:\n  For all the rest is flat, insipid Being.\nI mention this the rather, because it may serve for one Instance of\nwhat Improvements our Modern Poets have made on the Ancients, when\nthey built upon their Foundations. For we find that many of the fine\nthings of the Ancients are like Seeds, that, when planted on\n+English+ Ground by a Skilful Poet's Hand, thrive, and produce\nexcellent Fruit.\nBut I'm afraid this +Preface+ has been too long and tedious for this\nsmall Piece; but the Press stays, and the hast I'm in will not\npermit me to make it shorter, or so much as review it; yet before I\nconclude, I\u00a0must inform the Reader, that I had the Advantage of\nanother's doing their +P+lays before me; from whose Translation I\nhad very considerable Helps, especially in the +Jests+ and\n+Quibbles+.\nThe Augustan Reprint Society\n  WILLIAM ANDREWS CLARK\n  MEMORIAL LIBRARY\n  UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES\nPUBLICATIONS IN PRINT\n[Decoration]\n  [Where available, Project Gutenberg e-text numbers are given in\n  brackets.]\n16. Henry Nevil Payne, _The Fatal Jealousie_ (1673).  [16916]\n18. Anonymous, \"Of Genius,\" in _The Occasional Paper_, Vol. III, No. 10\n(1719), and Aaron Hill, Preface to The Creation (1720).  [15870]\n19. Susanna Centlivre, _The Busie Body_ (1709).  [16740]\n20. Lewis Theobald, _Preface to the Works of Shakespeare_ (1734).\n22. Samuel Johnson, _The Vanity of Human Wishes_ (1749), and two\n23. John Dryden, _His Majesties Declaration Defended_ (1681).  [15074]\n26. Charles Macklin, _The Man of the World_ (1792).  [14463]\n31. Thomas Gray, _An Elegy Wrote in a Country Churchyard_ (1751), and\n_The Eton College Manuscript_.  [15409]\n41. Bernard Mandeville, _A Letter to Dion_ (1732).  [29478]\n98. _Select Hymns Taken Out of Mr. Herbert's Temple_ (1697).\n104. Thomas D'Urfey, _Wonders in the Sun_; or, _The Kingdom of the\n110. John Tutchin, _Selected Poems_ (1685-1700).  [_In Preparation_]\n111. Anonymous, _Political Justice_ (1736).\n112. Robert Dodsley, _An Essay on Fable_ (1764).\n113. T. R., _An Essay Concerning Critical and Curious Learning_ (1698).\n114. _Two Poems Against Pope_: Leonard Welsted, _One Epistle to Mr. A.\nPope_ (1730), and Anonymous, _The Blatant Beast_ (1742).  [21499]\n115. Daniel Defoe and others, _Accounts of the Apparition of Mrs. Veal_.\n116. Charles Macklin, _The Covent Garden Theatre_ (1752).  [_In\nPreparation_]\n117. Sir George L'Estrange, _Citt and Bumpkin_ (1680).  [_In Preparation_]\n118. Henry More, _Enthusiasmus Triumphatus_ (1662).\n119. Thomas Traherne, _Meditations on the Six Days of the Creation_\n120. Bernard Mandeville, _Aesop Dress'd or a Collection of Fables_\n(1704).  [_In Preparation_]\n122. James MacPherson, _Fragments of Ancient Poetry_ (1760).  [8161]\n123. Edmond Malone, _Cursory Observations on the Poems Attributed to\nMr. Thomas Rowley_ (1782).  [29116]\n124. Anonymous, _The Female Wits_ (1704).  [_In Preparation_]\n125. Anonymous, _The Scribleriad_ (1742). Lord Hervey, _The Difference\nBetween Verbal and Practical Virtue_ (1742).  [_In Preparation_]\n126. _Le Lutrin: an Heroick Poem, Written Originally in French by\nMonsieur Boileau: Made English by N.\u00a0O._ (1682).\nSubsequent publications may be checked in the annual prospectus.\nPublications #1 through 90, of the first fifteen years of Augustan\nReprint Society, are available in bound units at $14.00 per unit of six\nfrom:\n  KRAUS REPRINT CORPORATION\n  16 East 46th Street\n  New York, N.Y. 10017\nPublications in print are available at the regular membership rate of\n$5.00 yearly. Prices of single issues may be obtained upon request.\n  William Andrews Clark Memorial Library:\n  University of California, Los Angeles\n  THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY\n  _General Editors_: George Robert Guffey, University of California,\n    Los Angeles; Maximillian E. Novak, University of California, Los\n    Angeles; Robert Vosper, William Andrews Clark Memorial Library.\n  _Corresponding Secretary_: Mrs. Edna C. Davis, William Andrews Clark\n    Memorial Library.\nThe Society's purpose is to publish reprints (usually facsimile\nreproductions) of rare seventeenth and eighteenth century works. All\nincome of the Society is devoted to defraying costs of publication and\nmailing.\nCorrespondence concerning memberships in the United States and Canada\nshould be addressed to the William Andrews Clark Memorial Library, 2520\nCimarron St., Los Angeles, California. Correspondence concerning\neditorial matters may be addressed to any of the general editors at the\nsame address. Manuscripts of introductions should conform to the\nrecommendations of the MLA _Style Sheet_. The membership fee is $5.00 a\nyear in the United States and Canada and 30 -- in Great Britain and\nEurope. British and European prospective members should address B.\u00a0H.\nBlackwell, Broad Street, Oxford, England. Copies of back issues in print\nmay be obtained from the Corresponding Secretary.\nPUBLICATIONS FOR 1967-1968\n127-128. Charles Macklin, _A Will and No Will, or a Bone for the\nLawyers_ (1746). _The New Play Criticiz'd, or The Plague of Envy_\n(1747). Introduction by Jean B. Kern.  [_In Preparation_]\n129. Lawrence Echard, Prefaces to _Terence's Comedies_ (1694) and\n_Plautus's Comedies_ (1694). Introduction by John Barnard.\n[_Present Text_]\n130. Henry More, _Democritus Platonissans_ (1646). Introduction by P.\u00a0G.\nStanwood.  [_In Preparation_]\n131. John Evelyn, _The History of . . . Sabatai Sevi . . . The Suppos'd\nMessiah of the Jews_ (1669). Introduction by Christopher W. Grose.\n[_In Preparation_]\n132. Walter Harte, _An Essay on Satire, Particularly on the Dunciad_\n(1730). Introduction by Thomas B. Gilmore.  [29237]\nANNOUNCEMENTS:\nNext in the series of special publications by the Society will be a\nvolume including Elkanah Settle's _The Empress of Morocco_ (1673) with\nsix plates; _Notes and Observations on the Empress of Morocco_ (1674)\nby John Dryden, John Crowne and Thomas Shadwell; _Notes and Observations\non the Empress of Morocco Revised_ (1674) by Elkanah Settle: and\n_The Empress of Morocco. A\u00a0Farce_ (1674) by Thomas Duffet, with an\nIntroduction by Maximillian E. Novak. Already published in this series\nare reprints of John Ogilby's _The Fables of Aesop Paraphras'd in Verse_\n(1668) with an Introduction by Earl Miner and John Gay's _Fables_ (1727,\n1738), with an Introduction by Vinton A. Dearing. Publication is\nassisted by funds from the Chancellor of the University of California,\nLos Angeles. Price to members of the Society, $2.50 for the first copy\nand $3.25 for additional copies. Price to non-members, $4.00.\nTHE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY\nWilliam Andrews Clark Memorial Library\n2520 Cimarron Street at West Adams Boulevard, Los Angeles, California\nMake check or money order payable to THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF\nCALIFORNIA.\nErrata (noted by transcriber)\n_In the Prefaces, errors were corrected only if a later edition showed\nthe same correction._\n_Editor's Introduction_\n  under the imprint of Thomas Salusbury [_spelling is correct_]\n  another's doing their [i.e., \"these\"?] Plays before me\n    [_this and following bracketed notes are in the original_]\n_Preface to Terence_\n  vix de demenso suo, suum defraudans genium\n    [demcuso ... defrudans]\n  Eheu me miseram!  [Ehen]\n  ni unum desit [de sit]\n  perfectly just, truly proportionably  [. for,]\n  he never fails in any one place, but  [. for,]\n  why he goes off, where he's a going  [goes of]\n  the whole cou'dn't contain above Eleven hours  [about Eleven hours]\n  for such inferior Persons, we leave to others.  [. invisible]\n  or to say very little, as  'twas agreeable to them\n    [_s in \"as\" invisible_]\n  In some things they are too short, in others too long  [. for,]\n  _School-Masters_ often want time, and now and then Judgment\n      [time. and now then and]\n  some hints we had from the _French_, but  [. for,]\n  _Odiosus_, _Tristis_, &c. these we\n    [_missing ; or : after \"&c.\", OR error for \"These\"_]\n  They may possibly take 'em for Blunders  [' missing or invisible]\n  but we have better offend this way than the other  [beeter]\n_Preface to Plautus_\n  due Observance and Penetration  [Penitration]\n  Exit +Euclio+. [Eudio]\n  And besure you secure the Door  [_spacing as shown_]\n  For the Reader's Satisfaction, here follows  [he follows]\n_Augustan Reprints_\n  UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES  [. for,]\n  and 30 -- in Great Britain and Europe  [_unchanged_]", "source_dataset": "gutenberg", "source_dataset_detailed": "gutenberg -  Prefaces to Terence's Comedies and Plautus's Comedies (1694)\n"},
{"content": "In Scotland, never before had there been such dancing and revelry as at Christ's Kirk on that day. No longer at Falkland on the Green or Peebles at the play were there such wooers as those present. For Kitty appeared, washed clean and in a new gown of gray. The damsels, those fair maids, were adorned with gloves of the finest rafe, shoes of the strictest fit, and kirtles of Lincoln's light fabric, intricately plaited. They were so charming when men approached them that they squealed like doves. The day was filled with their sweet voices.\n\nOf all these gentle maidens, none was as unassuming as Gillie. Her cheeks were as red as any rose, her lips like the lily, but her hair was yellow, and she was so foolish in love. Despite her kin swearing her dead, she would have none but Willie. She scorned Jack and turned away from him, and he, in turn, loved her deeply but could not win her heart. She counted him not worthy of two clocks, and his short legs were like stumps.\nTom Lutter was their minstrel. Good Lord, how he could play and sing,\nHe played so shrill, and sang so sweet,\nWhile Tousie took a trance,\nOld Lightfoot there he could foresee,\nAnd counterfitted France:\nHe held him like a man discreet,\nAnd up the Morrice dance.\nHe took that day.\nThen Stephen came stepping in with stands,\nNo ri, Splay-foot did bob with many bends,\nFor Masie he made request.\nHe lap while he lay on his lends;\nAnd rising was so prest,\nWhile he did host at both the ends,\nFor honor of the Feast,\nAnd danced that day.\nThen Robin Roy began to revel,\nAnd Tousie to him drugged:\nLet be, quoth Jack, and called him jevel,\nAnd by the tail him rugged.\nThen Kensie clicked to a kevel,\nGod wots as they two lugged,\nThey parted there upon a nevel,\nMen say their hair was rugged.\nBetween them two\nWith that, a friend of his cried \"fy,\"\nAnd forth an arrow drew.\nHe forged it so forcefully,\nThe bow in slenders flew,\nSuch was the grace of God, I trow,\nFor had the tree been true:\nMen said, who knew his archery,\nThat he had slain anew.\nBelieve that day,\nA young man nearby, who was eager,\nbent his bow in anger.\nAnd placed the child at his breast:\nthe arrow flew over the bier:\nAnd cried, \"He has slain a Priest,\na mile beyond the mire.\"\nBoth bow and quiver from him he kept,\nand fled as fast as fire.\nFrom Flint that day,\nAn hasty kinsman named Harry,\nwho was an expert archer,\nTied up a tackle without delay,\nI suppose the man was ten:\nI don't know whether his hand wavered\nor his Foe was his friend:\nBut he hoped by the might of Mary,\nas one who meant nothing,\nBut good that day,\nThen Lawrence, like a lion, leapt.\nAnd soon found food for his foe,\nHe aimed to pierce him at the Pope,\nthereon to wed a Wedder\nHe hit him on the belly a blow,\nit bounced like any bladder.\nHe escaped, such was his luck;\nhis Doublet was of Leather,\nVery fine that day.\nThe buffalo so boisterously assaulted him,\nthat he fell to the earth in dread.\nThe other man left him for dead,\nand fled from the town.\nThe Wives came forth, and lifted him up,\nand found life in him.\nThen with three ropes.\nAnd he cured him from the wound,\nFrom the hand that day.\nThe Miller was of a manly build.\nThere was no hesitation to meet him:\nNot ten of them dared take him,\nSo intimidated were they by his power.\nThe bushment all around him broke,\nAnd surrounded him with bows.\nThen traitorously behind his back,\nThey hoisted him onto the hurdles\nThat day.\nThen Hutchin with a hazel rod\nRan through them, muddling them down like mice,\nHe was no Betty Bummel.\nThough he was strong he was not wise,\nWith such jutors to jumble.\nFor from his thumb there flew a slice,\nWhile he cried \"Barlafummil.\"\n\"I'm slain this day.\"\nWhen he saw his blood was red,\nNo man could let him flee;\nHe thought it had been for old beef,\nHe hesitated and bade them come.\nHe placed his feet to defend his head,\nThe fairer it set him off:\nWhile he was beyond their reach:\nThey had to be swift to catch him.\nThrough their speed that day.\nTwo of the herdsmen, headsmen they were,\nRushed on each other like rams;\nThe other four, unharmed,\nBeat on with barrow trams.\nAnd where their gobs were unarmed, they mounted the G, with all their beards bloody as if they had worried lambs. Most like that day, they grimaced and glowed all at once, each man grieving for the other: some struck stings, some gathered stones, some fled, and some relieved. The Minstrel wisely kept quiet means, for he came home with unbruised banes where fighters were mischievived. Full ill that day. With forks and flails they lent them steps, and flew together like frigates: with boars of barns they pierced blue caps, and from their bairns they made brigs. The rare rose rudely with their raps, then rungs were laid on rigs. The wives came forth with cries and claps, see where my liking clings, full low this day. The black Souter of Braith was bowed down, his wife hanging at his waist: his body was in black all bowed down; he grimaced like a ghost, Her glittering hair was so bowed down, her love fast from him last, That for his sake she was unwilling while he was chastised, and more that day.\nWhen they had borne themselves like baited bulls,\nthe bone fires burned like bales,\nThen they grew as meek as mules\nthat were weary with mails,\nFor those who fought grew tired fools,\nfell down like slaughtered frails,\nFresh men came in and hailed the fools,\nand dragged them down in dales,\nBetween that da -\nThe wives then gave a hideous yell,\nwhen all these yokers yoked,\nAt fierce as flags of fire flaunted, fell,\nThe Carolingians with clubs did quell\non breast while blood out boiled,\nSo rudely rang the common bell,\nthat all the steeple rocked,\nFor fear that day.\nBy this Tom Tailor was in his gear,\nwhen he heard the common bell,\nHe said he should make all on steer,\nwhen he came there himself,\nHe went to fight with such a fear,\nwhile to the ground he fell,\nA wife that hit him on the ear\nwith a great knocking mill,\nFelled him that day.\nThe bridegroom brought a pint of ale,\nand bade the piper drink it,\nDrink it, quoth he, and it so stale,\nshrew me if I think it.\nThe bride's maids stood near by,\nand said it was not blinking.\nAnd Bartagesie the Bride so gay winked at him,\nsoon that day all was done, Dick with an ax came forth\nto fell a Fother, quoth he, where are you whoreson smacks,\nright now that hurt my Brother, his Wife bade him go home, Gib-Glaiks,\nand so did Meg his Mother. He turned and gave them both their palks,\nfor he durst do no other, But they that day FINIS.\n\nTo the Tune of the Last Good Night.\n\nWoe be that pultran Poverty,\nWae worth the time that I him saw\nSince first he laid his Fang on me\nMy self from him I dought ne're draw:\nhis wink to me has been a Law,\nHe haunts me like a penny dog,\nOf him I stand far greater aw\nThan Pupil does of Pedagogue.\n\nThe first time that he met with me,\nWas at a Cl, its name I trow Kilbareban be,\nWhere Habies Drons gave many a blast.\nThere we shook hands, cald be his cast,\nAn ill dead may that Custron die:\nFor there he gripped me right fast\nWhen first I fell in Cautionrie.\n\nBut yet in hopes to be relieved,\nAnd free'd from that foul Ladlie Lown.\nFernier, when Whigs were ill-mischieviv'd\nAnd forced to fling their weapons down,\nWhen we chased them from Glasgow Town,\nI, with that Swinger, thought to grapple,\nBut when Indemnity came down,\nThe Lordon caught me by the thigh,\nBut yet, in hopes of more relief,\nI made a race to Arinfre,\nWhere they did bravely buff my beef,\nAnd made my body black and blue.\nAt Justice Court I them pursued,\nExpecting help for their reproof,\nIndemnity thought nothing due,\nThe deed,\nBut wishing that I might ride east,\nTo trot on foot I soon would tire,\nMy page allowed me not a beast,\nI wanted a horse.\nHe and I leapt over many a syre,\nI heckled him at Calder culter.\nBut long ere I came to Clypes-myre\nThe ragged rogue caught me a while.\nBy the Bridge of Bonny Almond,\nWe bickered down towards Bankier,\nWe feared lest\nNor why\nMy tattered tutor took no fear,\n(Though he did travel in the murk)\nBut thought it fit when he drew near\nTo fish a forage at Falkirk.\nNo man would open me the door,\nBecause my comrade stood by,\nThey dreaded I was right poor.\nBy my forsaken company. But Cunninghame soon espied me,\nHailed me with a how and a hair, and swore we should not part so dry,\nThough I were stripped to the skin. I bade all night, but long ere day,\nMy cursed companion bid me rise, I started up and took the way,\nHe needed not to bid me twice. But what to do I did advise,\nIn Leith I might not sit down, On a Scots groat we began,\nAnd in at night to Edinburgh town. We held the Long gate to Leith Wind,\nWhere poorest purses use to be, And in the Caltoun we judged fine,\nFit quarters for such company. Yet High-Town would have seen us,\nBut that my comrade did me discharge, He would have me black and blue,\nAnd must my heart the morn I ventured up the Wind,\nSloughed in at the Neather-Bow, Thinking that Trooker for to tie,\nWho does me damage what he does: His company he does bestow,\nOn me to my great grief and pain, Ere I the throng could wrestle through,\nThe low was at my heels again. I longed to go on the plain-stanes,\nTo see if comrades would me ken; We two went The hungry hour.\nI knew no way how to go, but my gut churned like a mill race, I dined with saints and noble men, even sweet St. Gilbert and Earl of Murray; a testament to their hospitality, for I needed not my teeth to eat, though I was in a cruel sweat, he didn't ask my opinion. I called him Turk and taunted Tyke; and wore him down with many a curse, my banes were hard like a stone wall, No Rig Maria was in my purse. Kind Widow Caddel sent for me to dine, as she often did, but alas, that couldn't be! For her house was too near the tollbooth. Yet God reward her for her love and kindness, which I am most grateful for, before that hound of hell took her in hand. I slipped my page and made my way to Leith to try my credit at the wine shop, but alas, a foul drizzle filled my teeth, he caught me at the coffee sign. I staggered through the Nether Wynd, my Lady Semple's house was near, to enter there was my plan, where poverty would never dare. I dined there, but I didn't stay long, my lady was eager to shelter me.\nBut alas, I must go\nAnd leave that comely company.\nHer lady conveyed me with her key\nOut through the garden to the fields,\nBefore I could truly see\nMy governor was at my heels.\nI doubt not to dance to pipe or Mary,\nI had no stock for cards nor dice,\nBut I'm sure to Sir William Sharp,\nWho never made his counsel nice;\nThat little man he is right wise\nAnd sharp as any brier can be;\nHe bravely gave me his advice\nOn how to poison poverty.\nBy the dial in Hatton Garden bright and sheen,\nA sovereign herb, called penny royal,\nWhich all the year grows fresh and green.\nCould you but gather it fair and clean,\nYour business would not go backward,\nBut let the account of it be seen\nTo the physicians of the Exchequer.\nOr if their ticket you bring with you,\nCome unto me, you need not fear,\nFor I have some of that herb to give you\nWhich I have planted this same year.\nIt will cause your page to disappear\nWho waits, on you against your will;\nTo gather it, I shall teach you.\nIn my own yards at Stony-hill,\nBut when I feared that would not work,\nI thought of a wile how I might,\nAt my leisure, beguile my Graceless Guardian.\n'Tis but a mile-long gallop through Cannongate,\nTill I have sanctuary a while,\nWithin the girth of Abbey Closs.\nThere I went in and was blissful,\nWhen to the Inner-Court I drove,\nMy Governor I defied,\nFor joy I spread my wings and flew,\nThere messengers dared not pursue,\nNor with their wands could men's shoulders flee,\nThere dwell distresses Lairds in peace,\nThough they have little gear:\nI had not tarried an hour or two,\nWhen my blessed fortune was to see,\nA sight, by Mary's might,\nOf that brave Duke of Albany.\nWhere one blink of his princely eye\nPut that son-of-a-founder to the flight,\nFrom me he banished poverty,\nAnd made him take his last good-night.\nFINIS.", "creation_year": 1710, "creation_year_earliest": 1710, "creation_year_latest": 1710, "source_dataset": "EEBO", "source_dataset_detailed": "EEBO_Phase1"},
{"content": "The Churches Paradox: Or The Substance of a Sermon\nPreached at the Place of Cumbusnethen, in the Parish of Cumbusnethen, Clydsdale. By Mr. John Welsh.\nZechariah 14:6-7. Verses.\nAnd it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark: but it shall be one day which shall be known to the Lord, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass that at evening time it shall be light.\nZechariah 14:6-7. Verses.\nAnd it shall come to pass in that Day, that the light shall not be clear nor dark: but it shall be one day which shall be known to the Lord, not day nor night: but it shall come to pass that at evening time it shall be light.\nThe Church encounters various circumstances during her militant existence on Earth. At times, she shines brightly, as the sun, clear as the moon, strong as an army with banners. At other times, she is like a dark night; she is under heavy dark clouds, she walks in darkness, and has no light.\nBut in Isaiah 50.10, the Church's condition can differ from both extremes. She may have some light and some darkness. This is the condition Zechariah describes: If the light is neither clear nor dark, neither completely clear like noon, nor completely dark like midnight, but rather like evening tide, when there is some light before the night comes, a mixture of wrath and mercy should be dispensed upon the Church. The Church is promised comfort in this condition. First, her sad state will only last for one day, a very short time. Second, at evening, a promise is made to the Church.\nIt shall be light: that is, when there is greatest appearance of sadness and darkness night, then immediately the Lord shall cause the Day Spring from on high to arise upon the church. We shall speak of only three or four things concerning this, regarding doctrine.\n\nFirstly, from these words, we learn that the Lord's dispensations with the church can be neither clearly dark nor light, neither night nor day, but possess elements of both. There may be judgment and mercy in the church's case.\n\nSecondly, we notice that the time of the church's trouble, though sometimes prolonged, can also be brief, as it is here, lasting only one day.\n\nThirdly, though the church's trouble may be brief and its end unknown to all, it is a day known to the Lord.\nThough neither enemies nor friends know when the Day of Delivery will come, yet it is a day known to the Lord: It is a limited time that God has set the bounds of.\n\nFourthly, when the Kirk in all appearance and probability looks like a thicker and blacker darkness and greater desolations, then very shortly the Lord will make light to arise, and the Day Spring from on high to arise upon the Kirk, even at the evening, at evening-tide it shall be light.\n\nNow a work shortly to each of these things: And now for the first, which was this, that the Kirk may be sometimes in a case that can neither be dark nor clear, neither dark nor light, neither night nor day; but as it were, somewhat in her case that looks dark like, and somewhat in her case that looks bright and lightsome like again: This is prophesied to be in the days of the Gospel, that in the days of the Gospel there should be let out upon the Kirk.\nThis prophecy refers to the Church of God during the days of the Gospel. The Church will sometimes be in a state where it cannot be described as entirely light or entirely dark, nor day or night. Instead, it will be a mixture of both. The Church of Israel in Egypt was similar, with both light and dark aspects. There were signs of God's forgetting and forsaking her, as well as signs of His remembering and delivering her. The light and white aspects of her situation were that the Lord gave Moses a sign that He had seen their afflictions in Egypt.\nAnd he came down to deliver them, sending a commissioner to Pharaoh to bid him let the Children of Israel go, as they would be out of the Land of Egypt to serve Him. This seemed light and promising to them, a day of relief in their case, and a white spot in their cloud. But their joy was short-lived, as instead of being delivered from their affliction, they were given a new one. Pharaoh, instead of letting them go, made their bondage stronger and greater. This looked very dark to them, and the people grew dejected and heartless, giving no thanks to God for this or to Moses for his pains. This was also the case with the Church in the days of the New Testament, with some things looking very dark and some things light.\n\nAnd first of all,\nIn the early days of the New Testament, when all the people of the church in Jerusalem were summoned, an honest man named Stephen was stoned to death, marking the beginning of the new religious community. Yet, even in this dark event, there was something light and hopeful. The scattered ministers went out and preached the gospel everywhere, and their teachings had a profound impact, bringing many people to Jesus Christ. Ministers were eager to preach, and the people were receptive, resulting in a gathering of the outcasts through God's blessing.\n\nDuring the Babylonian captivity, when the King of Babylon led the Church of Israel into captivity from Jerusalem, the situation appeared very dark. The temple was burned and destroyed, the church and people were taken into captivity, enemies were set up, and the people of God were overthrown.\n\nHowever, even in this dark period, there was a glimmer of hope. The Lord kept some prophets and teachers among the people.\nFor your information, the text appears to be written in Old English and contains some errors. Here's the cleaned version:\n\n\"For pointing out to them their duty and what Israel should do: They were not left without means, for they had the Word and Prophets among them, which was like light. Moreover, it was manifested that at the end of the 70-year period that should be fulfilled on them in Babylon, they would be visited again, and I would perform my good word towards them by causing them to return to this place. This is what the Lord says: 'After seventy years are fulfilled at Babylon, I will visit you, and I will perform my good word towards you by causing you to return to this place.' There were seventy years of sad captivity in Babylon, which was dark. But there was a return to their former privileges again after the seventy years were fulfilled, which was blissful and light. They were driven out of the church at Jerusalem\"\nBut they were a Kirk among themselves, light-hearted like again. They were cast out of the Church at Jerusalem, which was sad; but they were not cast out of the Heart and Mind of God, which was light like again; they had the Manifestations of His Good Will to bring them back to their former Privileges, which was light like.\n\nApplying this to our present case: We may apply this to our present situation; we may say it is the present case of the Church of Britain and Ireland today. There is something very black in our present Dispensation, and there is something very white and daylike in our present Dispensation - as white spots in a cloud and something daylike in the midst of our night. In the first room, we shall speak a word about what is very black in our present Dispensation, and there are these black tokens in our present case.\n\nFirst,...\nThe LORD has taken away His Ordinances, which is a very dark and sad night for us. Many of God's people cannot see through it. It is so sad that He has emptied so many congregations at once, which is very dark.\n\nSecondly, this is a very dark period in the present dispensation as there is no one to plead for Zion's cause. Most of the great ones have passed her by, turning their backs on God and the church, and commanding their subjects to do the same. Those who look kindly upon Zion are the objects of their scorn. It is a dark period that the Gentiles have also turned their backs on Zion, offering no help or compassion, which is also very dark.\n\nThirdly, this is a very dark period in our present dispensation.\nThe People of God are so full of divisions that they cannot agree on what constitutes sin and duty. One Godly person considers an action a duty, while another sees it as a sin. This lack of agreement among the godly is a sign of great darkness. One Godly person deems an action a sin, another says it is a duty. It is sad that such disagreements exist even among the godly. It would be nothing if it were between us and our enemies, but for it to exist among the godly themselves is very sad and dark.\n\nFourthly, this situation is also problematic in our present dispensation.\nThere is so much failing and fainting in the ways of God, and such a turning aside to crooked paths. Few are valiant for truth in this present dispensation. It is also dark that none knows the length of our darkness continuing. Few are being revealed anything of God's mind concerning the delivery of His work. He has hidden Himself in His anger. He has hidden Himself in His wrath. He has shut Himself up as within a stone-wall, revealing nothing of His mind to us. This is also dark in the present dispensation, that few stir themselves to lay hold on Him, and few stand in the gap to turn away His wrath. It is also dark that all our public ordinances have gone, along with our private meetings. The rulers, as if by a wicked law, have chased us all away from a part of our duty.\nAnd we have run away from another part of it uncaught; They have violently shut us away from the Public Ordinances, and we have run away from the private meetings of the people of God, and we have not studied to edify them: As if we were loosed from our ministry, when we were shut away by a wicked law. This looks very dark, also, and is an evidence of greater darkness, that there are so many faithful, able and honest ministers taken away by death at this time; some by the Lord's hand, and that by an ordinary death; and others, that enemies have cruelly executed; and so there are many useful instruments of His work taken away. This indeed might have been useful instruments, if the Lord had kept them alive; each one of them might have been as a thousand, and if helped of God, would have been very useful for a glorious work: And now their being removed and taken away, looks very sad and dark.\nAnd it is very dark now in this Dispensation; the Lord (seems to) shine upon all the designs of the enemy, and discountenances (seems to) any attempt of His people for their own defense. This is very dark, for almost nothing that the enemies undertake fails, and nothing that God's people undertake as a means of defense fails: it is also very dark in this Dispensation, that there is so much profanity and atheism threatening to take hold among us; and instead of professing the Protestant religion, people are not only not professing it, but denying it. And people are not only falling away from godliness, but falling away from the profession of it; many are turning Popish in our Kirk. This is very dark and night-like in the present Dispensation.\nThe more God strikes us, the more hardened we become; the more we are smitten, the harder our hearts become. These events appear very dark and ominous for the Church in Britain and Ireland. However, there are also some light tokens in these divine dispensations. Our current dispensations are a mixture of light and darkness: some light and some darkness are present. For we have many black tokens in our dispensations to sadden us, but we also have some white spots in the midst of our cloud, giving us grounds for hope. I shall name four or five of these.\n\nThe first thing that looks clear and is a token for good:\nwhich is a White Spot in the midst of our Cloud; The Lord is giving His People an answer at this time, both of their own prayers and of many others who have died in the faith. I say, He is now giving the people of God an answer to all their prayers, and they never know it. What were their prayers? Was not this their prayer that God would take some effective way of purging His House and making His inns clean, and of making Himself a clean house? And now, is He not giving an excellent answer to all these prayers, though we little observe it? This was the prayer of the people of God, and they have now received an answer. Presbyteries did little in this: There were always unworthy ministers kept in, and elders who should not have been kept in, and because formal and legal process could not be obtained against them, they were always kept in and not cast out.\nwere as pricks and thorns in the flesh and sides of the honest party; and this put them to their praying again, that God would take some effective way to purge His House. And whether He is answering these prayers or no, judge ye and see. O but He is now taking some effective way to purge His House of many naughty ministers & elders, who otherwise would not have been cast out in haste; He is doing more for the purging of His House in one year now by this present dispensation, than could have been done in twenty years by presbytery. This is also a sign, that God is taking such an effective method, and thereby answering the prayers of the saints for making to Himself a tight building again.\n\nSecondly, there is another thing that looks very much like, and day like again in the present dispensation, and that is, all those that God hath brought to the stage at this time to bear testimony for His cause, they have been helped of Him to carry it so honorably for His cause.\nThat they have shown great respect for it through their sufferings, making it more glorious than ever before. The cause has become more honorable due to the martyrdom of my Lord Argyle, Mr. Guthrie, and others banished, than it would have been through their actions, even if they had lived longer. This is a small white spot in the midst of our cloud, as dying and living, He makes His people show respect for His dearest cause.\n\nThirdly, there is something white in the present dispensation, as the Lord is turning the enemies' plans for the utter ruin of God's work against them, making it more difficult for them and giving His people more hope.\nand so it contributes to the advantage of God's work and has advanced it greatly. There are other acts they have put forth against His cause and people, advancing God's work greatly, the cruelty of their designs, accomplished in their wicked acts, has done much good to this work, though they intended it for ill. Some of their acts that they have now put forth have put ministers to the fields to preach. If they had not been so cruel, they would have sat still at home. But now the cruelty of their acts has put them to the fields to preach, and people to the fields to hear them, who otherwise would have sat still in their nests, if their acts had not been so cruel. Their acts have done much good to the cause of God. For it has likewise bred in the hearts of the very profane a loathing of them and their way, and a love for the truth more than before. Their sending out to quarter, cease, and plunder.\n\"though they intended it for their cause, they have been so far from advancing it that they have brought many on their side to turn against them, even those who were almost complying and had respected them before this cruelty. This is a white spot in the present dispensation and gives us hope that the Lord will arise with the light of the Gospel for the poor Church of Britain and Ireland, as he begins to plead the cause of his people when we are shut up and none are left to plead for us. He has said, 'put up your sword, and I will draw mine.' He has said to his people, 'put up your sword.'\"\nI will not lay my fingers on them, but I will show you what I will do with the great nobles and ladies who break my covenant in London. They could not set their noble feet upon the Lord's earth when they went down to the breach of God's covenant. But I will make them (says the Lord) roll in holes and ditch sides, where their carcasses shall stink upon the ground. When the populous city London, where all this mischief was first contrived against the work of God and the covenant first burned, I say all these mischiefs were contrived and acted. God has dung His sword against them (that is, by the visitation or plague) and laid them heaps upon heaps. God has given His people a seeing end of them, so that they are forced to pity their enemies and say, alas, alas for them, and father alas for that which has come upon them. This is a white spot in our cloud, and says, \"Alas, alas, for them!\"\nThat God will yet avenge the Quarrel of a broken Covenant, for He is beginning to do so already. Lastly, we have this to look forward to, clear as in the present Dispensation, and a white spot in the midst of our clouds: the heinous perfidy of the Prelatal Party, which says that God will be avenged on them. This is a ground of hope that we had even all those men once in our midst, who now cry down this work and spit upon it, as it were, and labor to get it under: these men once in a day cried it up as fast as we do now; they cried up the Covenant and cried up the cause, and put it up upon others to do so, and suffer for, as well as the suffering servants of God who are now suffering for its doing. I know there is some of you in this parish who knows something of it and has been witness to it; that once he who is turned prelat among you swore the Covenant before you and was very forward in it. In a word.\nspoke as much for it as any other about him; and swore you to your Covenant at your Sacrament, Mr. James Hamilton, Bishop of Galloway, and then shook his lap, and said, \"So let God shake every man out of his inheritance who does not abide by this Covenant.\" We have this advantage over all these enemies, that they once cried up the work, and not long ago, and cried down prelacy as fast as we cry it down now; but if they hold it as a principle to be the right government of the Church of Christ, it would have been manly of them to have cried it up. But in this they are behaving like beasts, that they always hold to the side that offers the most outward advantage; their perjury says that God will be avenged on them, and gives His people ground for hope. For the last years they cried down prelacy and cried up the work and the cause of God as fast as any body.\nAnd then it was not only Saul among the Prophets with them. This may be a ground of hope for us and a white spot in our cloud. The second thing we would speak a word about from the text is this: But it shall be one day that shall be known to the Lord.\n\nThe doctrine is that, though sometimes the Lord may prolong the trouble for His church for a long time, yet there are other times when it will not be long but a short time, for one day. This is first when the enemy's cruelty is so great, and they are very violent. Then it shall be but for one day. It is not long that they will reign when they are very cruel and violent in their course. Haman had one day, a little while, and oh, he was cruel. The acts he made were to the utter overthrow of God's church, and he would have it done all in one day; he would have all done in a little time; no peace and quiet.\nBut he will have completed all his tasks in one day; therefore, the Kirk will experience only one day of trouble. He will not allow her to remain under this tyranny when enemies are cruel, but will immediately provide an outlet. And so, at the beginning of the New Testament Church, a great heat of persecution arose; the honest man Stephen was stoned, and a great persecution ensued, but the Lord gave rest throughout all the Churches; yet, if it was cruel, the Lord did not allow it to last long. Applying this to our present case and dispensation, it says our darkness will not be long.\n\nFirst, this very party that is now rising up and active displays great violence; the violence used by this Prelatical party against us is such that it would scarcely have been seen even from the Turks, let alone from men of the same profession. What violence was contained in that act, in the midst of winter, to put so many families out seeking lodgings.\nAnd in winter quarters, they made the land desolate by forbidding any word to be spoken to those in need of direction and comfort. Secondly, the martyrs' lives were taken with great violence; they not only took their lives but denied them the honor of a burial, an act never before done to Protestant ministers by Protestant ministers. Thirdly, those banished were not given a month to prepare for banishment or the necessary time to settle their affairs, but were forced to leave immediately with \"sail with Violence & Drum,\" preventing them from seeing their wives and children if they did not come to them. Additionally, cruelty was used against them in this land through scourging.\nAnd burning them on the cheeks, and then banishment; I doubt who could express their fault before six judicious auditors. And what cruelty was used against that faithful minister, Mr. Smith? It was because he would not call the bishop \"my lord.\" Furthermore, because his friends had access to him in the Thieves Hole, where they communicated something to him for the supply of his necessity, they denied him the privilege, and put him in another hole where no access was to be had to him by none of his friends to come and comfort him. This was great cruelty. This and suchlike: their day will not be long. You know that because Satan was shortly to be trodden underfoot, therefore he was very violent. And so, because God has a party to destroy, when they have accomplished their work, therefore he gives them leave to tread them underfoot.\nAnd they went at a fast pace. We believed that the former bishops worked quickly once they were in the pit; yet he grants them the freedom to complete more work in one day, which the former bishops would not have accomplished in a year. This also indicates that he will not allow this trouble to last long among his people, lest they be driven to iniquity. His people are so afflicted and entangled by the burdens they bear that if we believe that the Lord Jesus Christ intends to keep his people free of sin and keep their garments clean at this time, and bring them through as we know he will, then we believe he will not let them continue under this trouble for long, for enemies are cruel. You may read their cruelty in Isaiah 22:51, where the violence of a parallel people is described: \"Thus says the LORD your God, who pleads the cause of his people: 'I have taken the cup of trembling from your hand, and given it to the hand of your enemies.'\"\nWho has said, \"Bow down your souls so we may pass?\" There, they inflict wrongs upon the People of God. It is not their bodies that will satisfy them; instead, they will have dominion over their consciences or nothing else will satisfy them. They will either have their souls to bow down so they may pass, or they have no satisfaction at all. The People of God would endure them or make less noise if it were only their bodies they were seeking victory over. But they will have their consciences and souls as well.\n\nFurthermore, I would use this to say that if the Church's affliction lasts but one day, because enemies are cruel as you may see, then endure it; many a man will regret not having endured longer; many a man will think to himself on the day of their deliverance, \"If only I had stayed it out one more day; if only I had paid the other fine.\"\nAnd heeded the command of Samuel and the other prophet, I had stained my conscience: I can allude to the word of Samuel to Saul, \"you shall wait a while before offering a sacrifice until seven days have passed\"; this was the word of the LORD to him, and then Samuel promised to appear to him. But Saul grew anxious under pressure from the Philistines and suffered hardships. Unable to endure it any longer, he disobeyed and offered a sacrifice before the time had come. Many do the same when they are under great pressure, they resolve to disobey God's word a little and transgress their conscience, crossing the line entirely. But Saul had barely finished offering the sacrifice when Samuel arrived. Oh fool, he thought to himself, if only I had waited one more day.\nThen it had been well. Could you not endure it for one more day? Can you not suffer a day laborer? Can you not bear to have the cross upon your back for one day? What if He had asked you to bear it all your days, would you not have done so before doing worse? Will you not be content to bear it for one day? It is one day that shall be known to the Lord. Do you say, I would endure it and I know how long it will last; but alas, I cannot tell when that day will come. Well, says the Lord, indeed that is true, I will neither reveal it to friends nor foes; but it is a day known to the Lord: Let that satisfy you. It is a day known to Me, who loves you as well as you love yourselves, and there is the point. The day of the Church's trouble, and how long it will last or when it will end, is a day that He keeps secret, and neither reveals it to friends nor foes: He will not let enemies be disposers of the Church's trouble, for then it would last too long: He will not let friends be disposers of it.\nThe Lord knows when this event will begin, determining its start. He also controls the darkness associated with it, deciding the number and thickness of clouds. Lastly, He knows when it will end, preventing any extension by the enemies of the Church. The Church's trouble, including its timing, manner, period, and close, is in the Lord's control, and the world cannot prolong it. How long did Pharaoh intend to keep Israel in Egyptian bondage? Certainly not to the end of the world.\nAnd I have no doubt they believed so themselves, just before they were freed, that they would never escape; but though the Devil and enemies of God's Kirk set their time to be at the end of the world; yet God had set His time as well, and that was not their time; but it was the same night they entered Egypt, that very same night they marched out of Egypt; that very same night their bondage ended: They could not stay any longer; that very night they were required to go. Could they not have stayed till morning? No. From the time was up, they could not stay a moment longer; that very night they were required to march. Now the last word is, at evening time it shall be light, it shall be light, it shall be light, and they had all sworn the contrary, it shall not be light; yet prelates and malignants would all gather together against the Church as a thick cloud, yet it shall be light.\nAnd it shall be more Light at evening than people expect, even when they think a dark hour is approaching. Therefore, the note states that when the greatest darkness is suspected, the LORD will immediately cause Light to arise for the Church. We have two things to add:\n\nFirst, despite the Church facing trouble for a time, it will not continue in darkness; it will be Light. God is strong enough to bring Light to the Church in opposition to weak vessels, as He has promised to make a lamp always shine before His Anointed.\n\nSecond, it will be Light even at the darkest hour. God is wise enough to bring Light to Her.\nThough men cannot see what way it will come, he is strong and wise enough to bring it about, both in opposition to the malice and wiles of men. For your comfort, I give you two reasons. First, there is some light in the midst of our darkness. Second, it shall be light; the people of God shall have light; light shall shine for the righteous: The Son of Righteousness shall arise with healing under his wings. For he has made all his friends within these lands to look for light; they are all made to hope for it, and long for it; this is their expectation, both dying and living; this they live in the hope of, and this they die in the faith of, because he has said, \"The expectation of the poor shall not perish.\" (Psalms 9:18) Third, it shall be light in this generation, for if no more light were to arise upon us, it would be a great discouragement for people in another generation who own God and his way.\nWhen it grew dark for them, and a cloud fell upon them; it grew dark for you, they say, and they never emerged from it. They never came out from under the cloud, and so we think neither will we, as this would put them out of all hope of recovery of light any more. Since He has a people to bring through many various troubles, one after another, and has truth to convey them from one generation to another, and His people to bear up that way: there, though it were not for our sakes, yet for the generation to come, that they may not be utterly discouraged when a cloud and darkness falls on them: therefore He will have light to arise upon us; it shall be light.\n\nFourthly, it shall be light: there is this ground for it, the Lord is putting more spirits in His ministers and people than before. He is beginning to work some more light and life at the hearts of His people; though it is true, we are all far from the thing that we should be; yet some ministers have more heart to venture to preach.\nAnd people have more heart to seek light than they did before: This signifies it shall be light. But next, at evening it shall be light; it shall not only be light, but light at the evening; that is, when the greatest darkness is expected: There's the point. The church and people of God are never closer at hand a delivery and daylight, than when it is darkest; The church of God is never closer to daylight, than when it is darkest with her: When in all human appearance there is any darker, and darker night coming, that is any great evidence of drawing near to the light. Israel's light came in Egypt when in all men's eyes it seemed to grow darker, for their bondage and slavery were made greater, their task was doubled; they were put to impossibilities, they were forbidden to have straw given them, and yet to fulfill the task of their brick; they were put to impossibilities, and when put to impossibilities, then it grows light. And if you would speak-when the church in these lands will be delivered.\nIt will be shortly after Ministers and People are put to impossible situations; and is there not something of that coming forth already in some of their Acts, wherein Ministers are charged to flee twenty miles from their own parish-kirk, and many such Acts which are like that, which the People of Israel were put to in Egypt, which were impossibilities; Go get you straw, yet fulfill the peal of your brick.\n\nWell then, when it is darker than ever before, then gather ye the more hope from it, that shortly it shall be light; ay, the darker it grows, gather the more hope of light; ay, when there comes a new act forth more severe and cruel than the former, then bless God for that; your delivery is nearer than before, that is ay a new token of light: At evening it shall be light, That is a new token that light is not far off. Indeed, if you look upon things by human reason, you will plead yourselves out; but we must plead by God's Word and Promise.\nAnd that is contrary to human reason that at evening it shall be light. O say, you have never been so put to the test as we are now; never so stressed and pressed as we are now. Perhaps you have not encountered this in this place, but Galway and the west of Scotland have. Well, when this comes to your door that you are so sore put at, we all benefit from it. It is a token of deliverance. I shall say no more. The Lord bless what has been spoken unto you.", "creation_year": 1710, "creation_year_earliest": 1710, "creation_year_latest": 1710, "source_dataset": "EEBO", "source_dataset_detailed": "EEBO_Phase2"},
{"content": "THE false and scandalous Papers mentioned above, with great industry and malice, have been spread throughout this Kingdom to asperse the characters of several honorable and worthy Gentlemen represented as enemies to the Illustrious House of Hanover, and to hinder their election as Members of the ensuing Parliament. For the right information of the electors, for vindicating the reputation of the candidates, and for giving a full, authentic, and satisfactory answer to the said false, scandalous, and seditious pamphlets, the following abstracts from the Gazette are made public.\n\nWhereas two printed Papers have recently been dispersed abroad: one entitled, \"A Test offered to the Consideration of the Electors of Great Britain\"; and the other entitled, \"A List of the Honourable House of Commons that voted for and against the Clause for the Hanover Succession, in the Year 1702.\" In these Papers, amendments made by the Lords to the Bill entitled \"An Act for the further securing the Protestant Succession in the Crown of Great Britain\" are mentioned.\nAn Act for enlarging the time for taking the Oath of Abjuration and recapacitating and indemnifying such persons who have not taken it by the appointed time: The House of Commons considered these amendments on the 13th of February, 1702.\n\nAnd whereas, after setting forth, verbatim, the clause following, viz.,\n\n\"For the further security of Her Majesty's person, and the succession of the Crown in the Protestant line, and for extinguishing the hopes of the Pretended Prince of Wales and all other pretenders, and their open and secret abettors; Be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if any person or persons, at any time after the first day of March, 1702, shall endeavor to deprive or hinder any person who shall be the next in succession to the Crown, according to the Act declaring the rights and liberties of the subject and settling the succession of the Crown, and the other Act entitled, An Act for the further limitation of the Crown.\"\nAnd better securing the Rights and Liberties of the Subject, from succeeding after the Decease of Her Majesty (whom God long preserve), to the Imperial Crown of this Realm, and the Dominions and Territories thereunto belonging, Sophia, Electress and Duchess Dowager of Hanover; and after the Decease of the said Princess Sophia, the next in Succession to the Crown for the time being, according to the Limitations of the said Acts. Whoever maliciously, advisedly and directly attempts, by any overt act or deed, to infringe upon these provisions, shall be guilty of high treason. The offender or offenders, along with their abettors, procurers, and comforters, knowing of the offense, shall, upon conviction or attainder, be deemed and adjudged traitors, and shall suffer the pains of death, as well as all losses and forfeitures, as in cases of high treason. Additionally, the substance of other clauses is set forth.\nThe question for agreeing with the Lords in these Amendments was put in the House of Commons after debate. The House divided, resulting in a majority of one vote. According to the Journal of the House of Commons from the session begun in October 1702, as well as the Original Minute Books, the said clause, marked B, was agreed to by the House of Commons.\nAnd without any division thereafter: The division in the House on the 13th of February had 118 yea's and 117 no's, which was regarding a precedent amendment on Clause A, as follows:\n\nProvided always, that no person or persons, who due to any mistake, neglect, or omission, have left or forfeited any office, benefit, place, dignity, or employment, to which another person or persons have been preferred or promoted, shall be restored to such office, benefit, place, dignity, or employment. Anything in this contained to the contrary notwithstanding.\n\nThe other amendments made by the Lords to the bill were agreed to by the House of Commons without division.\n\nPaul Jodrell, Clerk of the Commons.\n\nThis certificate from Mr. Jodrell indicates which clause there was no division on and which clause there was, and that the division was on this clause.\nAnd yet, the clause having no relation to the Protestant Succession. It is clear that had the disputed clause been rejected, the Protestant Succession would have been equally secure under the passing clause, which did not cause division and passed without contradiction. The only difference between those who disagreed and those who agreed to the clause was that the former wished to extend the benefit of the Act for enlarging the time for taking the Oath of Abjuration and other requirements to all who had not done so within the specified time, whether their places were filled or not. The latter, on the other hand, sought to deny this benefit to those whose misfortune it was to have their places not only forfeited but filled. The former advocated granting the same favor to all persons with equal claim to it; the latter denied it to those whose misfortune it was to have their places filled instead.\nThey were for denying, after this Amendment was sent down from the Lords, the favor granted to some, which they themselves, as well as others, had granted to all before the Bill was sent up to the Lords. This is a plain and full answer to all the cavils and artifices used to evade a charge of malicious forgery in framing a list, whereby many gentlemen of the greatest families and fortunes have been basely traduced as enemies to the Protestant Succession and the Illustrious House of Hanover. This attempt is the more scandalous and inexcusable because when Dyer had, in his news-letters, affirmed that the Commons had divided about the clause relating to the Succession, a prosecution of him was ordered by the House of Commons, as appears from the following:\n\nJohn Dyer, a writer of news, having in his papers of the 18th of the last month, inserted the following words, \"The Commons to-day agreed to the Amendments made by the Lords to the Abjuration Bill.\"\nBut they divided on matters relating to the Succession, yet carried it through. Ayes 118. Noes 117. However, there was no division on any part of the Bill concerning the Succession or making it high treason to alter the Succession, as it is now established by law; instead, it passed without contradiction. The House of Commons took notice of this false and scandalous report and ordered Dyer to appear at the bar of the House, but he did not appear, and the session being near an end, they further ordered him to be found and prosecuted for the same. He was taken into custody and is to make his appearance at the Court of Queen's-Bench on the first day of the next term. Her Majesty has given directions to the Attorney-General to prosecute him according to law for publishing the false, scandalous, and sedition-inciting news.\n\nIn summary, the only matter under debate is whether the gentlemen accused voted against the clause securing the Protestant Succession.\n[1710] I will support the interests of those who did not vote against the House of Hanover in the upcoming elections, contrary to the claims made in the new Black List. They are friends, not enemies, to the House of Hanover.\n\nPrinted by Jonah Bowyer, at the Rose in Ludgate-street.", "creation_year": 1710, "creation_year_earliest": 1710, "creation_year_latest": 1710, "source_dataset": "EEBO", "source_dataset_detailed": "EEBO_Phase2"},
{"content": "Shewing, How a Gentleman having married, a young Lady in St James's Street, they agreed to travel together for the Space of five Years, to see foreign Parts. How as soon as they came to Spain, intending to take a View of the Place, they were both seiz'd by Order of the Inquisitor. Also how they were separately examined and charged with Crimes that they were innocent of. How they underwent their Punishments inflicted on them, in order to exhort a Confession from them. Like\u2223wise, how they were tried by their Court of Justice, and condemn'd to be burnt alive. The Manner of their Behaviour at the Place of Execution, where they were tormented near two Hours before they expired, during which Time there continued a dreadful torm of Thunder and Light'ning those cruel Wretches that came to see them suffer.\nOF all the Nations in the Universe,\nThere's none sure can compare\nWith Spain, for bloody Sentences,\nAs I'll to you declare:\nThe Manner of their Inquisition,\nIs what I shall relate:\nA beauteous Couple, as we hear,\nThis Squire's Name and Place: Arrow Smith in St James's Street. He had a yearly income of four hundred pounds and a beautiful wife. Her beauty was unmatched; her cheeks were like fragrant roses. She was the age's beauty, and he was a fine young man. Their love engaged them for five years to travel foreign parts and then return to their native place.\n\nHe said to his lady one day, \"My dear, will you agree to go with me to foreign parts to see their customs? We will return here in five years.\" She answered, \"I'm ready to obey all your commands. I will go freely with you through the world.\" She was not afraid to travel wherever he pleased because he was all she valued, her whole support and ease.\n\nPreparations were soon made.\nThey having agreed that they would go to Spain first, they set out with haste. They took with them two serving men to wait on them. But their scene of misery, I will relate to you. They took a spacious lodging there and spent some days in pleasure, viewing the country round, which was their sole intent. At last, a wicked Jesuit cast an eye upon her, saying, \"If I do not enjoy her, they surely both shall die.\" This villain used all means he could to gain her company, but never could obtain his ends to stain her chastity. At last, being swelled with rage and wicked lust, he gave an information there were two who would not turn. The Inquisitor said, \"Then let them be brought before me to answer for their insolence. I'll soon make them agree: How dare they to withstand our laws, that are so good and just. If they be stubborn in their ways, they shall burn to dust.\" This beautiful couple was then seized, not knowing what they meant. The lady, frightened to them, said,\nA Squire before the Inquisitor was questioned, having refused to comply with their laws. He declared, \"Before I renounce the religion I profess, I'd rather choose to burn.\" The Inquisitor, infuriated, threatened, \"You shall have tortures, hell, and fire, as you desire, since it is your wish. You are guilty of numerous crimes, despite your denial. But if you confess and repent, I'll show you mercy.\" The Squire defied the Inquisitor's superstitions and remained silent. Orders were given to take him away and punish him severely. In a dismal, dark dungeon, they were separated. The Lady was greatly frightened.\nAnd seemed to grieve full sore;\nAnd to see each other's face,\nThey implored the Lord.\nA fire was quickly prepared,\nBefore it he was brought.\nHe moved feet foremost by degrees,\nTill his feet had been scorched.\nHe never seemed to wince or cry,\nBut still endured the pain;\nAnd when his life was almost spent,\nThey brought him back again.\n\nThe next lady was examined.\nShe did not know of crimes:\nThe judge said, \"Child, if you'll confess,\nI'll show you mercy.\"\n\n\"Confess what!\" she did say,\n\"I know not what you mean;\nTo my dear God I will be just,\nI value not your spleen.\"\n\nHe said, \"Child, if you'll but understand,\nYou are in a wrong cause;\nI'd have you know you're in this land\nSubmit to our just laws;\nOr else you and your husband both,\nYour trial soon shall take:\nFor heretics you shall be burned,\nIf you don't it forsake.\n\n\"As for your punishments she said,\n'I value not a pin.\nOne thing of you I have to crave,\nTo see my dear again;\nAnd grant we both in one urn,\nTogether may expire.'\"\nFor this good and glorious cause, I desire nothing more. The Inquisitor spoke, fair lady, pray do not be so stubborn. I can save you if you confess the crimes you have committed against me. Turn to our good religion, then you may dwell happily. But if you do not, you will surely burn. Undauntedly, she answered, I defy your subtlety. All the torments you can invent shall never make me deny the blessed tracks of my dear Christ, who will be my guardian and preserve me from tormenting pains for all eternity.\n\nTo the secretary, he then said, I am now fully determined, since she will not obey my commands. A severe punishment shall be inflicted upon her. She will be severely tortured because she will not turn.\n\nThey tied her down on her back, as well as her hands and feet. Poor soul, the cords were tied tightly, making her sweat. Then, they poured water through a fine lawn cloth down her throat. But still, she would not comply, though she was almost choked.\n\nThe Inquisitor gave orders then,\nThat she should be untied. And for their stubborn insolence, they both should soon be tried. Poor lady she was almost spent, with their cursed cruelty; but the first word she spoke was this, before I'll turn: I'll die. You may torment my body here, but cannot hurt my soul; with patience I'll bear your torments, you never shall control me: My blessed God is good and just, and will stand by me still; so I'm resolved to still observe His blessed holy will. 'Twas in a dismal dungeon where, no light was to be seen; she valued not what she endured, for the blessed cause she stood in. Six months this squire and his love were confined there; he said, O God, grant that I may once more see her face; I value not these wretches' spleen, could I preserve my wife: I defy all the torments, I value not my life, poor souls they had a great desire, each other for to see. The jailor that attended them,\nSaid Sir, that cannot be:\nYou will not see your Lady fair,\nUntil you're brought to Justice;\nAnd if you don't turn to our Faith,\nYour deaths are surely wrought.\n\nIn about six weeks after this,\nAn order came to bring them both\nTo Justice Hall, to receive their Doom.\nBut when they saw each other,\nWith extasy of joy,\nThe Lady fainted away,\nWho could such love annoy.\n\nSoon as they brought her to herself,\nTheir trials began,\nAnd in the cages they were put,\nPlaces for criminals:\n\nTheir accusation was read,\nThe judge to them did say,\nYou hear, prisoners, what is charged,\nAgainst you here this day.\n\nThe squire then asked the judge,\nWhere was his accuser?\nSir, that is not the custom here,\nReplies the Inquisitor:\n\nOne heinous crime's laid to your charge,\nWe are well assured,\nThat you are both guilty of it,\nWhich is damning heresy.\n\nAnd if it's so, you will not turn,\nUnto our heavenly Cause,\nYou and your wife shall surely burn,\nAccording to our Laws:\n\nThe judge then spoke to the Lady,\nIf you will not comply,\nYou may be sure your souls are damned,\nTo all eternity. Then with a smiling countenance,\nThe Lady replied,\nYour idol worship is what I hate;\nI do defy your spleen:\nYou are a pack of hypocrites,\nI value not your laws:\nI'd lay ten thousand lives at stake,\nFor such a glorious cause.\n\nThere is a blessed Redeemer dear,\nThat will support us still;\nAnd all the tortures you invent,\nCan do our souls no ill;\nSince you have doomed us both to die,\nI value not my breath;\nWith crowns of gold we both shall meet\nIn heaven, after death.\n\nThe Inquisitor said to the judge,\nI pray the sentence give,\nFor eight and forty hours longer\nThey ought not to live:\nIf we take all this insolence,\nAnd they not punished be,\nTo Christ we shall give great offense,\nFor such indulgence.\n\nThe horrid sentence then was passed,\nThat they should burn alive;\nThe executioner was called,\nOn purpose to contrive,\nHow he might die a lingering death;\nThey answered soon and made,\nLeave that to us for punishment.\nWhen they are at the stake,\nTo the judge with courage bold,\nThe lady spoke, and made her plea,\nOne thing more I crave, she said,\nTo stay the time we're here,\nSo we may share one dungeon,\nAnd pray to Christ, who prepares,\nA blessed and happy feast.\nThis favor granted at last,\nWith much debate, her beauty shone,\nAdmired by those round about,\nShe showed no fear, nor daunted,\nThen in a dungeon they were placed,\nWhere no light could be seen,\nIn offering prayers and singing hymns,\nThey passed the night away,\nThe fatal morning came at last,\nIt was their time to be martyred,\nThe jailor spoke, \"Order's brought,\nYou must go with me.\"\nThe squire replied, \"With all my heart,\nI long to share the bliss,\"\nPoor souls, they eagerly met,\nTo take a parting kiss,\nTheir lips, O then, were loath to part,\nHe burst into tears, confessing,\n\"I value nothing but this life, my dear.\"\n\nYou need not value that, my love.\nWe shall meet again:\nWho would grudge to die, when such a glorious\nCause we now maintain? What are those tortures we endure,\nTo those blest joys above, Which we shall soon enjoy in Heaven,\nMy Dear and only Love? The jailor said, we must away.\nThis touched them most at heart. Then to the place of execution,\nHand in hand they went; While they were bidding each other farewell,\nThere was an order sent that the lady should be strangled\nBefore she was burnt. Hearing this, she hastily turned to the messenger:\nGo tell your master now from me, His favor I scorn;\nIn all that he can me torment, I value not at all.\n\nThe Inquisitor, hearing of this, again sent an order:\nThat they should die the hardest death\nThat ever could invent. When they had tied their hands with cords,\nThey then put a great and mighty weight upon their feet.\nAnd drew them up and down, near an hour and more.\nDespite all this, they endured the pain with patience. They did not weep as they underwent their tortures, but instead continued to sing psalms and hallelujahs. The fires and fizzles were then lit, and they were forced to hold them to their faces, a sight that was truly dreadful. A terrible storm of thunder, hail, and lightning descended upon these wicked wretches who had come to witness their demise. As soon as these blessed souls had expired, the dreadful storm ceased, and the sun's glorious light greatly increased. Seizing upon their wealth, these wretches scornfully told their servants, \"Now you may go to England.\" And they added, \"Tell how our heretic master and mistress were treated by us. Because they remained obstinate and abused our laws, they thought they could do as they pleased, but they were mistaken. And all such heretics as they, who dare defy our power.\"", "creation_year": 1710, "creation_year_earliest": 1710, "creation_year_latest": 1710, "source_dataset": "EEBO", "source_dataset_detailed": "EEBO_Phase2"},
{"created_timestamp": "07-07-1710", "downloaded_timestamp": "10-18-2021", "url": "https://founders.archives.gov/API/docdata/Franklin/01-01-02-0003", "content": "Title: Verses from Benjamin Franklin (the Elder), 7 July 1710\nFrom: Franklin, Benjamin, Sr.\nTo: \nBenjamin Franklin\u2019s uncle Benjamin Franklin (1650\u20131727), born at Ecton in Northamptonshire, was for many years a silk-dyer in London. After years of sickness and adversity, he settled at Boston in October 1715,\nAnd there a Kind, kind Brother found,\nBless\u2019t with a Wife and Num\u2019rous Race.\nFour years they did me kindly Treat\nBut noe Imployment did present,\nWhich was to me a burden great\nAnd could not be to their content.\nHe lived four years in Josiah Franklin\u2019s household, then in November 1719 moved to the house of his son Samuel, who had preceded him to America but had just married; and there he died (Genealogy, A.5.2.7).\nFranklin remembered his uncle as an ingenious man, the inventor of a shorthand which he taught his nephew, a collector of books and family anecdotes. From early manhood this clever, gentle man composed poems of love, sorrow, and thanksgiving, rendered the Psalms into his own verse, and contrived acrostics, crosses, ladders, and other curious verse forms. Many of these were written for his children, nieces, and nephews; three were addressed to his \u201cName[sake],\u201d though the child was in America and the old man was still in England. Punctuation, largely lacking in the manuscript, has been supplied in this and the following two poems.\nSent to My Name upon a Reportof his Inclineation to Martial affaires7 July 1710\nBeleeve me Ben. It is a Dangerous Trade\u2014\nThe Sword has Many Marr\u2019d as well as Made.\nBy it doe many fall, Not Many Rise;\nMakes Many poor, few Rich and fewer Wise;\nFills Towns with Ruin, fields with blood beside;\nTis Sloth\u2019s Maintainer, And the Shield of pride;\nFair Citties Rich to Day, in plenty flow,\nWar fills with want, Tomorrow, and with woe.\nRuin\u2019d Estates, The Nurse of Vice, broke limbs and scarts\nAre the Effects of Desolating Warrs.", "culture": "English", "source_dataset": "Pile_of_Law", "source_dataset_detailed": "Pile_of_Law_founding_docs", "source_dataset_detailed_explanation": "Letters from U.S. founders.", "creation_year": 1710}
]