Beauties in the chief Actors; but yet methinks it seems too much to form a
Hero that's a perfect Almanzor, with not one spark of Vertue, and only
remarkable for his extraordinary Strength and little Brains; such was
certainly Homer's Achilles, of whom I think the Father was in the right
when he observes, the Poet makes him not do one brave or virtuous Action,
all the while he lies before the Town: whereas Virgil's Hero, is, to tell
truth, an indifferent good Heathen, and, bating one or two slips, comes up
pretty well to his own good word. The same however may be said for Homer,
which our present Dramatists plead for their Excuse; that he copied his
Hero from those who were esteemed such in the barbarous Age in which he
liv'd,

Impiger, iracundus, inexorabllis, acer,
Jura neget sibi nata, &c.

Made up of Lewdness, Love, and Fighting: who, had he liv'd in our Days,
would have made an excellent Town Bully, I wish there were not too much
reason to say a modish Gentleman. But tho' old Homer took this way,
Virgil, who writes with much more Judgment and Exactness, and follows him
in many things, here thought fit to leave him; making his Hero, as I've
said, not only brave and prudent, but for the most part virtuous. Which
would much better form the manners of his Reader, than if they were set to
spell out Instruction from contraries, as Homer has done. Whence it
follows, the more virtuous a Hero is, the better; since he more
effectually answers the true end of Epics. After all, Rapin says, the
chief Excellency of an Heroic Poem consists in the just proportion of the
Parts; that perfect Union, just Agreement, and admirable Relation, which
the Parts of this great Work bear one towards another; and blames Tasso
for mingling all the Sweetness and Delicacy of Eclogues and Lyricks, with
the Force of an Heroic Poem. But I should think him mistaken here, and