Steps.

2. Because no single Hero, or true History, which the Ancients knew was
sufficient, without Fable, to furnish Matter for an Epic Poem. History,
says Aristotle, treats of particular Things as they really are; Poetry, as
they ought to be; and therefore he prefers Poetry as the more grave and
more instructive; the Poets being forc'd to follow the same Methods with
their Kindred-Art, that of the Painters, and gather a great many Beauties
together, out of 'em all, to steal one Venus.

3. A third Reason may be, because, supposing they should have found some
one Example from whence to enforce strongly any particular Point of
Morality, yet it would have miss'd those other Characters of Epic, most of
its Agreeableness, and all its Power to raise Admiration. A chast
Historian must not go about to amuse his Reader with Machines; and a Poet
that would imitate him, must have been forc'd to thin his Stage
accordingly, and disband all his glorious Train of Gods and Godesses,
which composes all that's admirable in his Work; according to that of
Boileau; Chaque Virtue devient une divlnitie.

And these, if I mistake not, were the main Reasons on which the
foremention'd Rules were grounded. Let's now enquire into the Strength and
Validity of them: To begin with Homer, he wrote in that manner, because
most of the ancient Eastern Learning, the Original of all others, was
Mythology. But this being now antiquated, I cannot think we are oblig'd
superstitiously to follow his Example, any more than to make Horses speak,
as he does that of Achilles, 2. If a Poet lights on any single Hero, whose
true Actions and History are as important as any that Fable ever did or
can produce, I see no reason why he may not as well make use of him and
his Example to form the Manners and enforce any Moral Truth, as seek for