to receive him into his houfe, and to teach his children. A while after, the Lord died; and he, by long practice upon his father's will, found the way of contriving a deed of conveyance of that house to himself and his heirs. Upon which he took poffeffion, turned the young 'fquires out, and received his brothers in their ftead*.

SECT. III.

A DIGRESSION CONCERNING CRITICS. THOUGH I have been hitherto as cautious as I could, upon all occafions, moft nicely to follow the rules and methods of writing laid down by the example of our illuftrious moderns; yet has the unhappy fhortnefs of my memory led me into an error; from which I muft immediately extricate myself, before I can decently purfue my principal fubject. I confefs with fhame it was an unpardonable omiffion to proceed fo far as I have already done, before I had performed the due difcourfes, expoftulatory, fupplicatory, or deprecatory, with my good Lords the critics. Towards fome atonement for this grievous neglect, I do here make humbly bold to prefent them with a fhort account of themselves and their art, by looking into the original and pedigree of the word, as it is generally understood among us, and confidering the ancient and present state thereof very briefly.

By the word critic, at this day fo frequent in all converfations, there have sometimes been diftinguished three pretend a donation of St. Peter's patrimony, which they have been never able to produce.

* Ibid. The Bishops of Rome enjoyed their privileges in Rome at first by the favour of the Emperors, whom at laft they fhut out of their own capital city, and then forged a donation from Conftantine the Great, the better to justify what they did. In imitation of this, Peter, "having run fomething be"hind-hand in the world, obtained leave of a certain Lord, &c. W. Wotton."

:

very different fpecies of mortal men, according as I have read in ancient books and pamphlets. For, first, by this term were understood fuch perfons as invented or drew up rules for themfelves and the world; by obferving which a careful reader might be able to pronounce upon the productions of the learned, from his tafte to a true relifh of the fublime and the admirable, and divide every beauty of matter or of ftyle from the corruption that apes it in their common perufal of books, fingling out the errors and defects, the naufeous, the fulfome, the dull, and the impertinent, with the caution of a man that walks through Edinburgh ftreets in a morning; who is indeed as careful as he can, to watch diligently, and spy out the filth in his way; not that he is curious to obferve the colour and complexion of the ordure, or take its dimenfions, much lefs to be padling in, or tafting but only with a defign to come out as cleanly as he may. Thefe men feem, though very erroneously, to have understood the appellation of critic in a literal fente; that one principal part of his office was to praife, and acquit; and that of a critic, who fets up to read only for an occafion of cenfure and reproof, is a creature as barbarous as a judge who fhould take up a refolution to hang all men that came before him upon a

it ;

trial.

Again, by the word critic, have been meant the reftorers of ancient learning from the worms, and graves, and duft of manufcripts.

Now, the races of thefe two have been for fome ages utterly extinct; and befides, to difcourfe any farther of them, would not be at all to my purpose.

The third and nobleft fort, is that of the TRUE CRITIC, whofe original is the most ancient of all. Every true critic is a hero born, defcending in a direct line from a celeftial ftem, by Momus and Hybris, who begat Zoilus, who begat Tigellius, who begat Etcætera the elder, who begat B--tley, and Rym-r, and W-tton, and Perrault, and Dennis, who begat Etcætera the younger,

And

And these are the critics from whom the commonwealth of learning has in all ages received fuch immense benefits, that the gratitude of their admirers placed their origin in heaven, among thofe of Hercules, Thefeus, Perfeus, and other great defervers of mankind. But heroic virtue itself hath not been exempt from the obloquy of evil tongues. For it hath been objected, That thofe ancient héroes, famous for their combating so many giants and dragons, and robbers, were in their own perfons a greater nuisance to mankind, than any of those monsters they fubdued; and therefore, to render their obligations more compleat, when all other vermin were deftroyed, fhould in confcience have concluded with the fame juftice upon themselves; as Hercules moft generoufly did; and hath, upon that fcore, procured to himfelf more temples and votaries than the best of his fellows. For thefe reafons, I fuppofe, it is, why fome have conceived, it would be very expedient for the public good of learning, that every true critic, as foon as he had finished his task affigned, fhould immediately deliver himself up to ratfbane, or hemp, or from fome convenient latitude; and that no man's pretenfions to fo illuftrious a character fhould by any means be received, before that operation was performed.

Now, from this heavenly defcent of criticism, and the clofe analogy it bears to heroic virtue, it is easy to affign the proper employment of a true, ancient, genuine critic; which is, to travel through this vaft world of writings; to purfue and hunt thofe monftrous faults bred within them; to drag out the lurking errors, like Cacus from his den; to multiply them like Hydra's heads, and rake them together like Augeas's dung; or else drive away a fort of dangerous fowl, who have a perverfe inclination to plunder the best branches of the tree of knowledge; like thofe Stimphalian birds that eat up the fruit.

These reasonings will furnish us with an adequate definition of a true critic; that he is a difcoverer and collector of writer's faults. Which may be farther put

beyond

beyond difpute by the following demonftration: That whoever will examine the writings in all kinds, wherewith this ancient fect has honoured the world, fhall immediately find, from the whole thread and tenor of them, that the ideas of the authors have been altogether converfant and taken up with the faults, and blemishes, and overfights, and mistakes of other writers; and let the fubject treated on be whatever it will, their imaginations are fo entirely possessed and replete with the defects of other pens, that the very quinteffence of what is bad, does of neceffity diftil into their own; by which means, the whole appears to be nothing elfe but an abftract of the criticifnis themselves have made.

Having thus briefly confidered the original and office of a critic, as the word is understood in its moft noble and univerfal acceptation, I proceed to refute the objections of those who argue from the filence and pretermiffion of authors; by which they pretend to prove, that the very art of criticifm, as now exercifed, and by me explained, is wholly modern; and confequently that the critics of Great Britain and France have no title to an original fo ancient and illuftrious as I have deduced. Now, if I can clearly make out, on the contrary, that the most ancient writers have particularly defcribed both the perfon and office of a true critic agreeable to the definition laid down by me; their grand objection, from the filence of authors, will fall to the ground.

I confess to have for a long time borne a part in this general error; from which I fhould never have acquitted myself, but through the affistance of our noble moderns; whofe most edifying volumes I turn indefatigably over night and day, for the improvement of my mind, and the good of my country.

Thefe have with

unwearied pains made many ufeful fearches into the weak fides of the ancients, and given us a comprehenfive lift of them. Befides, they have proved beyond contradition, that the very fineft things, delivered of old, have been long fince invented, and brought to light by

H

much

much later pens; and that the nobleft difcoveries those ancients ever made, of art or of nature, have all been produced by the transcending genius of the present age: which clearly fhews how little merit thofe ancients can justly pretend to; and takes off that blind admiration paid them by men in a corner, who have the unhappinefs of converfing too little with prefent things. Reflecting maturely upon all this, and taking in the whole compass of human nature, I easily concluded, that these ancients, highly fenfible of their many imperfections, muft needs have endeavoured, from fome paffages in their works, to obviate, foften, or divert the cenforious reader, by fatire or panegyric upon the critics, in imitation of their mafters, the moderns. Now in the common places of both thefet, I was plentifully inftructed, by a long course of useful ftudy in prefaces and prologues; and therefore immediately refolved to try what I could difcover of either, by a diligent perufal of the most ancient writers, and especially those who treated of the earliest times. Here I found to my great furprife, that although they all entered, upon occafion, into particular descriptions of the true critic, according as they were governed by their fears or their hopes; yet whatever they touched of that kind, was with abundance of caution, adventuring no farther than mytho logy and hieroglyphic. This, I fuppofe, gave ground to fuperficial readers, for urging the filence of authors, against the antiquity of the true critic; though the types are fo appofite, and the applications fo neceffary and natural, that it is not easy to conceive, how any reader of a modern eye and taste could overlook them. I fhall venture from a great number to produce a few, which I am very confident will put this question beyond difpute.

It well deferves confidering, that these ancient writers, in treating enigmatically upon the fubject, have gene[* See Wotton of ancient and modern learning.] [ Satire and panegyric upon critics.]

rally