that this is not the meaning of Aristotles [Greek: analogon]. For if we
allow not such a pleasing Variety, how shall we excuse even Virgil
himself, who has his Dido, as well a Tasso his Armida and Erminia? nay,
how shall we manage Love? which is usually one great Episode of Heroic, if
not with something of Delicacy. I grant Love ought to have a different Air
in different sorts of Poems; but still if it be natural it must have
something of Softness; and for his Enchanted Forrest, which this severe
Critic also blames, I believe there's few who read that part of his Work,
who would willingly have it omitted, for the sake of a fancied Regularity,
any more than they would part with Mr. Dryden's Improvement on't in his
King Arthur. However, if it be a fault, 'tis strange so many who have been
Masters of the greatest Genius should unanimously fall into it; as Ovid in
his Palace of Circe, Ariosto in that of Alcina, and Spencer in his
Acasia's Bower of Bliss, and several others, who have taken the same
Method. I should therefore rather think that this beautiful and marvellous
Analogy which Aristotle requires as the best thing in Epic, relates rather
to the Harmony and Agreement of the Parts with the Whole; so that there
appears no Fracture or Contradiction, the different Parts, tho' much
unlike, yet all together making one beautiful Figure and uniform Variety.

And thus much of the Definition of Epic, containing the main Rules
thereof, by which the Reader may be able to form a Judgment of this, or
any other Heroic Poem: Especially if to these Rules be added some Examples
to render them more plain. In order to which, I desire to express my
Thoughts freely of other Poems, as I must expect every one will do of
mine, always observing that piece of Justice, never to find fault, without
taking notice of some Beauty to ballance it, and giving, where I can find
it, the better Judgment of other Persons as well as my own. Concluding all
with a brief Account of my own Work.