Twenty-seventh Lecture.

But I must just take Notice, that what we have advanc'd concerning the Sublimity of this Drama, is applicable to all Tragedies, but not equally to all. For as (what I have before observ'd) there are two Sorts of Comedies; the one taken from Characters of a higher Rank, the other perfectly low: So there are two Sorts of Tragedies, the one quite sublime, the other of a more humble Nature; the first representing Kings and Heroes, and the latter, Men of private Life, but of considerable Character and Station in it. This, indeed, is intirely modern; the Punishments or Misfortunes of Tyrants, and Princes, being the only Subjects of the ancient Tragedy. We said, that tho' it is form'd upon the Calamities of private Men, yet of such whose Authority and Station in Life make them considerable; because, tho' the Afflictions of common People afford Matter for Compassion, yet not for Tragedy, their Fortunes, and their Manners, being far below the Spirit of this Sort of Poetry, and the Dignity of its Style and Versification. Some of the best Performances of our own Writers, are of this Sort, affecting us not so much with Terror, as Compassion; in exciting which, the Moderns seem far superior to the Ancients.

Tragedies, likewise, admit of another Distinction, with Regard to their Event, either fortunate, or unfortunate. It is sufficient to be true Tragedy, that Incidents of Distress and Sorrow are carried on thro' the whole, tho' the principal Persons come off fortunately at last: I say, the principal Persons; because even in this Species, that ends happily, it is necessary that some Characters should be unhappy in the Conclusion, especially the worst, or rather they only. For I can by no means approve of those Tragedies of ours, in which Persons of equal Innocence and Virtue, of the same Rank and Eminence, are punish'd and rewarded promiscuously. It is so, I own, in human Life; but a single Dramatic Piece is not design'd to give us an intire View of it: Let it therefore be truly one, and entirely consistent. It may, indeed, very justly leave the best, and most distinguish'd Characters, in Distress at last; which (as shall be observ'd hereafter) is the most affecting Sort of Tragedy. But if some innocent and virtuous Persons are fortunate, let them be all so, and the bad only left miserable; otherwise the Drama will be inconsistent: And these opposite Agitations of Mind will weaken and destroy each other. Let the Audience go home either in a pleasant or melancholy Humour; if you attempt both, you succeed in neither.

But to return to the twofold Division, we observ'd, of this species of the Drama. "In Tragedies (says[440] Vossius) that are truly tragical, the first Scenes are usually more sedate, and the last dreadful. Thus, what a terrible Conclusion has the Phœnissæ of Euripides, where Oedipus, with his Eyes put out, is by Creon banish'd from Thebes, of which he had once been King? So, again, in his Hecuba, we see Polymestor in the same Distress; Hecuba bewailing the Murder of her Son, and the blind Polymestor relating the Calamities which the Oracle had denounc'd against Hecuba, Agamemnon, and Cassandra.[441] But if Orestes and Ægisthus, who were determin'd Enemies, had been reconcil'd, and parted without Blood-shed, the Tragedy had been less perfect. For, as we observ'd, Tragedy, in this respect, differs from Comedy, because this always ends happily, the other generally unhappily. And such should be the Conclusion of a Tragedy, according to the Rules of Art; but sometimes an unexpected Happiness arises from the greatest Distress: when this is the Case, the Poet departs from the Rules of Art, in Compliance with the Taste of his Audience, who had rather go home chearful, than melancholy. In the Electra, both of Sophocles and Euripides, the Plot takes this prosperous Turn, tho' Sophocles has shewn much greater Skill in the Conduct of it. Sophocles's Philoctetes in Lemnus, concludes in the same Way; as does Euripides's Iphigenia in Aulis; his Iphigenia in Tauri; and Alcestis; where, by Hercules's Assistance, Admetus has his Wife restor'd. And so his Orestes; for when Pylades and Orestes, incens'd at Menelaus, because he would not assist them against Tyndarus, had determin'd to put Helena, and his Daughter Hermione, to Death; Helena, by the Favour of the Gods, is taken up into Heaven, and Hermione (Menelaus coming first to her Relief, and Apollo interposing, to end the Controversy) is, by the Direction of that God, married to Orestes, who now expiated from his Mother's Blood, is made King of Argos. And his Helena again, concludes happily; where she, having artfully escap'd from Theoclymenus, returns to her Husband Menelaus, and sails, with a prosperous Gale, into Greece. So, likewise, his Tragedies of Hippolytus, Rhosus, and Ion. Even Ezekiel, the Jewish Tragic Poet, (as Clemens Alexandrinus calls him, Strom. Book I.) was the Author of a Drama, which he entituled, Εζαγωγη, or the bringing out; from whence Eusebius has transcrib'd no small Part into his Evang. Præp. Book IX. Chap. IV. And what Event could be more joyful, than the bringing that People out of Ægypt? Nor does Tragedy lose its Name, (as Vossius further observes) tho' the Conclusion is fortunate; because a melancholy Catastrophe is no Part of its Essence. Otherwise great Part of the Tragedies of Euripides, that are come to our Hands, would cease to be Tragedies. Wherefore, in Respect to the Essence of this Poem, it is sufficient, if it has upon the whole the real Appearance of Distress. So that the distinguishing Property of it may appear, in representing the doubtful and disastrous Fortunes of great Men. Tho' I cannot deny, (says he) but that such Tragedies borrow something from the Nature of Comedy. For the Nature of Tragedy is to be mournful, which is undeniable, since Terror and Commiseration are the chief Ends propos'd by it. When it is otherwise, it is only, as we said, in Compliance with the Taste of the People. Hence Aristotle says, that Poets fall into this Way of Writing, δια το των θεανρον ασθενειαν that is, to humour the wrong or weak Judgment of an Audience. But as the Populace are mutable, and inconstant, sometimes approving one Thing, sometimes another; the best Way is to keep close to the Nature of Tragedy, and not without great Necessity to depart from it."

Thus that great Man, whose Sentiments I should entirely approve of, if they did not seem, in one Particular, a little inconsistent. He says, it is not essential to Tragedies to end unhappily, which is certainly true; and yet is of Opinion, that such as do not end so, borrow something from the Turn of Comedy, because the very Nature of Tragedy is mournful. If by Nature he means the most distinguishing Property, his Opinion is, indeed, indisputable, but his Consequence is not just; because (as appears already, from both our Dissertations upon this Subject) Sorrow may be the prevailing Passion in a Drama, which, nevertheless, may conclude successfully. For every Scene of it, from the first to the last, may supply us with proper Objects of Terror and Compassion. If by Nature Vossius understands the whole Essence of Tragedy, he is not only mistaken, but plainly contradicts[442] himself; as appears from the Passages already quoted. The best Way, therefore, of determining this Point, seems to be, that both these Sorts are true Tragedies, but the one more tragical than the other.

However, that which is least tragical, and ends happily, requires more Art to write, and is read with more Advantage. With Regard to the first Particular, I shall beg Leave to cite the Authority of MrDryden. [443] Neither is it (says he) so trivial an Undertaking, to make a Tragedy end happily; for it is more difficult to save, than it is to kill. The Dagger, and the Cup of Poison, are always in Readiness; but to bring the Action to the last Extremity, and then, by probable Means, to recover all, will require the Art and Judgment of a Writer, and cost him many a Pang in the Performance." As to the Advantage, the Rewards and Punishments, by this Means, are more equitably adjusted: Which, indeed, may be tolerably affected in those Tragedies, which end unfortunately; For there, the chief Characters, being generally wicked, meet with that Punishment they deserve, and so strike a Terror into the Audience, which is accompanied, likewise, with some Mixture of Pity; for it is not necessary they should be notoriously wicked, to merit Punishment. Besides, sometimes they repent before they go off the Stage; as we have seen in two or three English Tragedies lately publish'd, which have met with that Applause they justly deserv'd: And even the Punishment of Robbers and Assassins, how justly soever they may deserve it, raises some Degrees of Compassion in us. I may add, farther, that in this Kind of Tragedy the Under-characters, which are innocent and virtuous, may at the Conclusion be rewarded for those Virtues, whatsoever Misfortunes they have struggled with before. Upon the whole, from comparing what has been said, it is plain, that even in those Tragedies which end unhappily, there is a Possibility that poetical Justice (as it is call'd) may be preserv'd: Tho' the other Sort is better adapted to this Purpose, where the chief Characters receive their proper Reward, the Virtuous made happy, and the Wicked miserable.

Terror is chiefly excited in us by a Representation of bad Men punish'd with Misfortunes; Pity with a Mixture of Terror, by a View of good Men under the same Circumstances; both Passions indifferently, by those who are not remarkable either for their Virtues, or their Vices. I have put the Case of good Men punish'd with Misfortunes, for it is consistent with the exactest Justice of the Drama, to make the most innocent meet the most disastrous Fate; a Sort of Tragedy the most tragical, of which our own Stage supplies us with many Instances. This Practice, I say, must be consistent with poetical Justice, which is strictly so with the divine. It was, indeed, less equitable upon the ancient Stage, when the Heathens knew very little of the Rewards and Punishments of a future State: But with us Christians the Case is entirely different.

But tho' it is no Injustice to represent good Men labouring under Distress, even at the last; yet the Wicked should never come off in real Triumph, and Satisfaction: They should always, at least, be so far Sufferers, that if Death is not inflicted on them, nor any other external Punishment; yet they should feel the Anguish of their own Minds, and not enjoy any secret Satisfaction in their Vices. On the other Hand, tho' good Men, to raise our Compassion, are sometimes put to Death; yet we should, even then, see them supported by a just Consciousness of their own Innocence, and the Hopes of a better Life: For tho' the Things of this World are dispos'd of in so dark and uncertain a Manner as to make us often lament the Condition of the best of Men; yet Poets, like Preachers, should not fail to remind the Audience, that there certainly will be eternal Punishments and Rewards hereafter.

"The best Tragedies (says[444] Vossius) are those where the Characters are neither perfectly virtuous, nor extreamly wicked." If this Rule is to be confin'd to some of the Characters only, it is just; but will not hold, if extended to all of them. "For the Design of Tragedy is to raise Terror and Pity." No Doubt of it. "But when the Wicked are unfortunate, we are not much dispos'd either to be terrify'd, or touch'd with Compassion at it. For who (as Tully says) is ever mov'd at the Punishment of a Traitor, or a Parricide? It should rather raise a Sort of Satisfaction in us, to think that Justice has overtaken those that have so well deserv'd it?" But, with Submission to the great Names of Cicero and Vossius, all good and generous Minds are affected with Compassion at the Execution of Rebels and Traitors; and nothing can be more terrible than the Punishment inflicted upon some of them. "Nor should they be Characters of unblemish'd Virtue; for Calamities of a good Man raise a secret Indignation; and it looks like a Sort of Inhumanity to suppose that the best of Men may be most miserable; to which I may add, that such a Representation may have some Influence in deterring weak and unthinking Minds from Virtue." There might be some Reason to believe so, if there was no other Life but the present; otherwise 'tis a weak Suspicion. Besides, is there no other Occasion to introduce good Characters upon the Stage, but to make them miserable? Has not he himself already[445] determin'd, that there are some Tragedies which end unhappily, and others happily? What he has farther advanc'd upon this Subject, is generally right. "Therefore the properest Characters for the Stage, are those of a middle Nature, between the two Extreams of Virtue and Vice; whose Errors, rather than Crimes, make them unfortunate; as Oedipus in Sophocles: Or who are reduc'd, by Necessity, to commit some wicked Action, it being the last Expedient; as Medea first kills her Brother Absyrtus, and afterwards her own Children. Not that these Characters are always requisite; for Ægisthus and Clytæmnestra are unpardonably wicked; Electra is good; Orestes rather virtuous, than not; Agamemnon cannot be said to be bad, for tho' he sacrifices Iphigenia in Aulis, it is only in Obedience to the Oracle, and against his own Inclination. Nor can Hercules be said to appear in an indifferent Light, but rather in a good one. Wherefore we are not to conclude that those Tragedies must be entirely condemn'd, which are not in all Respects agreeable to Aristotle's Rules; but rather, that those are the best, which are conformable to them." The most tragical (with Submission to the learned Author) rather than the best, if the Rules he speaks of are really Aristotle's. For I am not satisfied, I confess, that they are his, nor does Vossius direct us where to find them[446]: Otherwise I am entirely of his Opinion in the rest I have quoted from him; except that I do not perfectly understand how it is possible for Men to act wickedly, ratione summa[447].

Twenty-eighth Lecture.