and imperfect。 Most of the fables of AEsop have diverse senses and
meanings； of which the mythologists chose some one that quadrates well to
the fable； but； for the most part； 'tis but the first face that presents
itself and is superficial only； there yet remain others more vivid；
essential； and profound； into which they have not been able to penetrate；
and just so 'tis with me。
But； to pursue the business of this essay； I have always thought that； in
poesy； Virgil； Lucretius； Catullus； and Horace by many degrees excel the
rest； and signally； Virgil in his Georgics； which I look upon as the most
accomplished piece in poetry； and in comparison of which a man may easily
discern that there are some places in his AEneids； to which the author
would have given a little more of the file； had he had leisure： and the
fifth book of his AEneids seems to me the most perfect。 I also love
Lucan； and willingly read him； not so much for his style； as for his own
worth； and the truth and solidity of his opinions and judgments。 As for
good Terence； the refined elegance and grace of the Latin tongue； I find
him admirable in his vivid representation of our manners and the
movements of the soul； our actions throw me at every turn upon him； and
I cannot read him so often that I do not still discover some new grace
and beauty。 Such as lived near Virgil's time complained that some should
compare Lucretius to him。 I am of opinion that the comparison is； in
truth； very unequal： a belief that； nevertheless； I have much ado to
assure myself in； when I come upon some excellent passage in Lucretius。
But if they were so angry at this comparison； what would they say to the
brutish and barbarous stupidity of those who； nowadays； compare him with
Ariosto？ Would not Ariosto himself say？
〃O seclum insipiens et inficetum！〃
＇〃O stupid and tasteless age。〃Catullus； xliii。 8。＇
I think the ancients had more reason to be angry with those who compared
Plautus with Terence； though much nearer the mark； than Lucretius with
Virgil。 It makes much for the estimation and preference of Terence； that
the father of Roman eloquence has him so often； and alone of his class；
in his mouth； and the opinion that the best judge of Roman poets
＇Horace； De Art。 Poetica； 279。＇ has passed upon his companion。 I
have often observed that those of our times； who take upon them to write
comedies （in imitation of the Italians； who are happy enough in that way
of writing）； take three or four plots of those of Plautus or Terence to
make one of their own； and ； crowd five or six of Boccaccio's novels into
one single comedy。 That which makes them so load themselves with matter
is the diffidence they have of being able to support themselves with
their own strength。 They must find out something to lean to； and not
having of their own stuff wherewith to entertain us； they bring in the
story to supply the defect of language。 It is quite otherwise with my
author； the elegance and perfection of his way of speaking makes us lose
the appetite of his plot； his refined grace and elegance of diction
everywhere occupy us： he is so pleasant throughout；
〃Liquidus； puroque simillimus amni；〃
＇〃Liquid； and likest the pure river。〃
Horace； Ep。； ii。 s； 120。＇
and so possesses the soul with his graces that we forget those of his
fable。 This same consideration carries me further： I observe that the
best of the ancient poets have avoided affectation and the hunting after；
not only fantastic Spanish and Petrarchic elevations； but even the softer
and more gentle touches； which are the ornament of all succeeding poesy。
And yet there is no good judgment that will condemn this in the ancients；
and that does not incomparably more admire the equal polish； and that
perpetual sweetness and flourishing beauty of Catullus's epigrams； than
all the stings with which Martial arms the tails of his。 This is by the
same reason that I gave before； and as Martial says of himself：
〃Minus illi ingenio laborandum fuit；
in cujus locum materia successerat：〃
＇〃He had the less for his wit to do that the subject itself
supplied what was necessary。〃Martial； praef。 ad lib。 viii。＇
The first； without being moved； or without getting angry； make themselves
sufficiently felt； they have matter enough of laughter throughout； they
need not tickle themselves； the others have need of foreign assistance；
as they have the less wit they must have the more body； they mount on
horseback； because they are not able to stand on their own legs。 As in
our balls； those mean fellows who teach to dance； not being able to
represent the presence and dignity of our noblesse； are fain to put
themselves forward with dangerous jumping； and other strange motions and
tumblers tricks； and the ladies are less put to it in dance； where there
are various coupees； changes； and quick motions of body； than in some
other of a more sedate kind； where they are only to move a natural pace；
and to represent their ordinary grace and presence。 And so I have seen
good drolls； when in their own everyday clothes； and with the same face
they always wear； give us all the pleasure of their art； when their
apprentices； not yet arrived at such a pitch of perfection； are fain to
meal their faces； put themselves into ridiculous disguises； and make a
hundred grotesque faces to give us whereat to laugh。 This conception of
mine is nowhere more demonstrable than in comparing the AEneid with
Orlando Furioso； of which we see the first； by dint of wing； flying in a
brave and lofty place； and always following his point： the latter；
fluttering and hopping from tale to tale； as from branch to branch； not
daring to trust his wings but in very short flights； and perching at
every turn； lest his breath and strength should fail 。
〃Excursusque breves tentat。〃
＇And he attempts short excursions。〃
Virgil； Georgics； iv。 194。＇
These； then； as to this sort of subjects； are the authors that best
please me。
As to what concerns my other reading； that mixes a little more profit
with the pleasure； and whence I learn how to marshal my opinions and
conditions； the books that serve me to this purpose are Plutarch； since
he has been translated into French； and Seneca。 Both of these have this
notable convenience suited to my humour； that the knowledge I there seek
is discoursed in loose pieces； that do not require from me any trouble of
reading long； of which I am incapable。 Such are the minor works of the
first and the epistles of the latter； which are the best and most
profiting of all their writings。 'Tis no great attempt to take one of
them in hand； and I give over at pleasure； for they have no sequence or
dependence upon one another。 These authors； for the most part； concur in
useful and true opinions； and there is this parallel betwixt them； that
fortune brought them into the world about the same century： they were
both tutors to two Roman emperors： both sought out from foreign
countries： both rich and both great men。 Their instruction is the cream
of philosophy； and delivered after a plain and pertinent manner。
Plutarch is more uniform and constant； Seneca more various and waving：
the last toiled and bent his whole strength to fortify virtue against
weakness； fear； and vicious appetites； the other seems more to slight
their power； and to disdain to alter his pace and to stand upon his
guard。 Plutarch's opinions are Platonic； gentle； and accommodated to
civil society； those of the other are Stoical and Epicurean； more remote
from the common use； but； in my opinion； more individually commodious and
more firm。 Seneca seems to lean a little to the tyranny of the emperors
of his time； and only seems； for I take it for certain that he speaks
against his judgment when he condemns the action of the generous
murderers of Caesar。 Plutarch is frank throughout： Seneca abounds with
brisk touches and sallies； Plutarch with things that warm and move you
more； this contents and pays you better： he guides us； the other pushes
us on。
As to Cicero； his works that are most useful to my design are they that
treat of manners and rules of our life。 But boldly to confess the truth
（for since one has passed the barriers of impudence； there is no bridle）；
his way of writing appears to me negligent and uninviting： for his
prefaces； definitions； divisions； and etymologies take up the greatest
part of his work： whatever there is of life and marrow is smothered and
lost in the long preparation。 When I have spent an hour in reading him；
which is a great deal for me； and try to recollect what I have thence
extracted of juice and substance； for the most part I find nothing but
wind； for he is not yet come to the arguments that serve to his purpose；
and to the reasons that properly help to form the knot I seek。 For me；
who only desire to become more wise； not more learned or eloquent； these
logical and Aristotelian dispositions of parts are of no use。 I would
have a man begin with the main proposition。 I know well enough wh