in Ariftophanes, Menander, and Moliere, were well ftruck off in their own time; but, that comparing them with true beauty, that part of Ariftophanes was a colouring too strong, that of Menander was too weak, and that of Moliere was a peculiar varnish formed of one and the other, which, without being an imitation, is itself inimitable, yet depending upon time, which will efface it by degrees, as our notions, which are every day changing, fhall receive a fenfible alteration. Much of this has already happened fince the time of Moliere, who, if he was now to come again, must take a new road. With refpect to ualterable beauties, of which comedy admits much fewer than tragedy, when they are the subject of our confideration, we must not too easily fet Ariftophanes and Plautus below Menander and Terence. We may properly hefitate with Boileau, whether we fhall prefer the French comedy to the Greek and Latin. Let us only give, like him, the great rule for pleafing in all ages, and the key by which all the difficulties in paffing judgment may be opened. This rule and this key are nothing else but the ultimate defign of the comedy. Etudiez la cour, & connoiffez la ville : L'une & l'autre est toujours en modéles fertile, *Boileau Art. Poet. chant. 3. In truth, Aristophanes and Plautus united buffoonery and delicacy in a greater degree than Moliere; and for this they may be blamed. That which then pleased at Athens, and at Rome, was a tranfitory beauty, which had not fufficient foundation in truth, and therefore the taste changed. But, if we condemn thofe ages for this, what age fhall we fpare? Let us refer every thing to permanent and universal tafte, and we shall find in Ariftophanes at least as much to commend as cenfure. Tragedy more uniform than comedy, XII. But before we go on to his works, it may be allowed to make fome reflections upon tragedy and comedy. Tragedy, though different according to the difference of times and writers, is uniform in its nature, being founded upon the paffions which never change. With comedy it is otherwife. Whatever difference there is between Efchylus, Sophocles, and Euripides; between Corneille and Racine; between the French and the Greeks, it will not be found fufficient to conftitute more than one fpecies of tragedy. The works of those great masters are, in fome refpects, like the fea-nymphs, of whom Ovid says, "That "their faces were not the fame, yet fo much alike that "they might be known to be fifters." Facies non omnibus una, Nec diverfa tamen, qualem decet effe fororum. The reafon is, that the fame paffions give action and animation to them all. With respect to the comedies of Aristophanes and Plautus, Menander and Terence, Mo liere and his imitators, if we compare them one with another, we shall find something of a family likeness, but much less strongly marked, on account of the different appearance which ridicule and pleafantry take from the different manners of every age. They will not pass for fifters, but for very diftant relations. The Muse of Ariftophanes and Plautus, to speak of her with justice, is a bacchanal at least, whose malignant tongue is dipped in gall, or in poifon dangerous as that of the aspic or viper; but whofe burfts of malice, and fallies of wit, often give a blow where it is not expected. The Mufe of Terence, and confequently of Menander, is an artless and unpainted beauty, of eafy gaiety, whofe features are rather delicate than ftriking, rather foft than strong, rather plain and modeft than great and haughty, but always perfectly natural. Ce n'est pas un portrait, une image femblable: The Mufe of Moliere is not always plainly dreffed, but takes airs of quality, and rises above her original condition, fo as to attire herself gracefully in magnificent apparel. In her manners fhe mingles elegance with foolery, force with delicacy, and grandeur, or even haughtiness, with plainnefs and modefty. If fometimes, to please the people, fhe gives a loose to farce, it is only the gay folly of a moment, from which the immediately returns, and which lafts no longer than a flight intoxication. The firft might be painted encircled with little fatyrs, fome grofsly foolish, the others delicate, but all extremely extremely licentious and malignant; monkeys always ready to laugh in your face, and to point out to indif criminate ridicule, the good and the bad. The fecond may. be fhewn encircled with geniufes full of foftness and of candour, taught to please by nature alone, and whofe honeyed dialect is fo much the more infinuating, as there is no temptation to distruft it. The laft must be accompanied with the delicate laughter of the court, and that of the city fomewhat more coarse, and neither the one nor the other can be feparated from her. The Mule of Aristophanes and of Plautus can never be denied the honour of sprightliness, animation, and invention; nor that of Menander and Terence the praife of nature and of delicacy; to that of Moliere must be allowed the happy fecret of uniting all the piquancy of the former, with a peculiar art which they did not know. Of these three forts of merit, let us fhew to each the juftice that is due, let us in each separate the pure and the true from the falfe gold, without approving or condemning either the one or the other in the grofs. If we muft pronounce in general upon the tafte of their writings, we must indifputably allow that Menander, Terence, and Moliere, will give most pleasure to a decent audience, and confequenly that they approach nearer to the true beauty, and have lefs mixture of beauties purely relative, than Plautus and Ariftophanes. If we diftinguifh comedy by its fubjects, we fhall find three forts among the Greeks, and as many among the Latins, all differently dreffed: if we diftinguish it by ages and authors, we fhall again find three forts; and we shall find three forts a third time if we regard more closely closely the fubject. As the ultimate and general rules of all these forts of comedy are the fame, it will, perhaps, be agreeable to our purpose to sketch them out before we give a full difplay of the laft clafs. I can do nothing better on this occafion than transcribe the twenty-fifth reflection of Rapin upon poetry in particular. General rules of comedy. XIII. "Comedy, fays he*, is a reprefentation of common life: its end "is to fhew the faults of particular characters on the «ftage, to correct the diforder of the people by the "fear of ridicule. Thus ridicule is the effential part "of a comedy. Ridicule may be in words, or in things; "it may be decent, or grotefque. To find what is ri"diculous in every thing, is the gift merely of nature; "for all the actions of life have their bright and their "dark fides; fomething ferious, and fomething merry.. "But Ariftotle, who has given rules for drawing tears, " has given none for raising laughter; for this is merely "the work of nature, and muft proceed from genius, " with very little help from art or matter. The Spa"niards have a turn to find the ridicule in things much "more than we: and the Italians, who are natural << comedians, have a better turn for expreffing it; their "language is more proper for it than ours, by an air " of drollery which it can put on, and of which ours "may become capable when it shall be brought nearer "to perfection. In fhort, that agreeable turn, that "gaiety which yet maintains the delicacy of its charac"ter without falling into dulnefs or into buffoonry, *Reflections fur la Poët. p. 154. Paris, 1684. "that |