That many of the ideas in the preface to _Ibrahim_ were not new even
in 1641 becomes plain if one reads the discussions of romance
written by Giraldi Cinthio and Tasso.[2] The particular way in which
Mlle. de Scudéry attempted to carry out those ideas in her later,
more subjective works she obligingly set forth in _Clélie_ in the
passage already alluded to. There it is explained that a
well-contrived romance "is not only handsomer than the truth, but
withal, more probable;" that "impossible things, and such as are low
and common, must almost equally be avoided;" that each person in the
story must always act according to his own "temper;" that "the
nature of the passions ought necessarily to be understood, and what
they work in the hearts of those who are possess'd with them." He
who attempts an "ingenious Fable" must have great
accomplishments--wit, fancy, judgment, memory; "an universal
knowledge of the World, of the Interest of Princes, and the humors
of Nations," and of both closet-policy and the art of war;
familiarity with "politeness of conversation, the art of ingenious
raillery, and that of making innocent Satyrs; nor must he be
ignorant of that of composing of Verses, writing Letters, and making
Orations." The "secrets of all hearts" must be his and "how to take
away plainness and driness from Morality."[3]

The assumption that the new prose fiction could be judged, as the
Scudérys professed to judge their work, first of all by reference to
the rules of heroic poetry is frequent in the next century--in the
unlikely Mrs. Davys (preface, _Works_, 1725); in _Joseph Andrews_ of
course, where the rules of the serious epic and of the heroic
romance are to aid the author in copying the ancient but, as it
happens, nonexistent comic epic; and in Fielding's preface to his
sister's _David Simple_ (1744). Both Richardson and Fielding were