poets; Laelius, called the Roman Socrates, himself a poet; so as
part of Heautontimeroumenos, in Terence, was supposed to be made by
him. And even the Greek Socrates, whom Apollo confirmed to be the
only wise man, is said to have spent part of his old time in putting
AEsop's Fables into verse; and, therefore, full evil should it
become his scholar Plato to put such words in his master's mouth
against poets. But what needs more? Aristotle writes the "Art of
Poesy;" and why, if it should not be written? Plutarch teacheth the
use to be gathered of them; and how, if they should not be read?
And who reads Plutarch's either history or philosophy, shall find he
trimmeth both their garments with guards {73} of poesy.

But I list not to defend poesy with the help of his underling
historiographer. Let it suffice to have showed it is a fit soil for
praise to dwell upon; and what dispraise may be set upon it is
either easily overcome, or transformed into just commendation. So
that since the excellences of it may be so easily and so justly
confirmed, and the low creeping objections so soon trodden down
{74}; it not being an art of lies, but of true doctrine; not of
effeminateness, but of notable stirring of courage; not of abusing
man's wit, but of strengthening man's wit; not banished, but
honoured by Plato; let us rather plant more laurels for to ingarland
the poets' heads (which honour of being laureate, as besides them
only triumphant captains were, is a sufficient authority to show the
price they ought to be held in) than suffer the ill-favoured breath
of such wrong speakers once to blow upon the clear springs of poesy.

But {75} since I have run so long a career in this matter, methinks,
before I give my pen a full stop, it shall be but a little more lost
time to inquire, why England, the mother of excellent minds, should