And with this Te Deum, on the part of Ravenscroft ended a petty controversy, which gives him his only title to be named in the life of an English classic.

From what has been detailed of these disputes we may learn that, even at this period, the laureate’s wreath was not unmingled with thorns; and that if Dryden still maintained his due ascendancy over the common band of authors, it was not without being occasionally under the necessity of descending into the arena against very inferior antagonists.

In the course of these controversies, Dryden was not idle, though he cannot be said to have been worthily or fortunately employed; his muse being lent to the court, who were at this time anxious to awake the popular indignation against the Dutch.  It is a characteristic of the English nation, that their habitual dislike against their neighbours is soon and easily blown into animosity.  But, although Dryden chose for his theme the horrid massacre of Amboyna, and fell to the task with such zeal that he accomplished it in a month, his play was probably of little service to the cause in which it was written.  The story is too disgusting to produce the legitimate feelings of pity and terror which tragedy should excite:  the black-hole of Calcutta would be as pleasing a subject.  The character of the Hollanders is too grossly vicious and detestable to give the least pleasure.  They are neither men, nor even devils; but a sort of lubber fiends, compounded of cruelty, avarice, and brutal debauchery, like Dutch swabbers possessed by demons.  But of this play the author has himself admitted, that the subject is barren, the persons low, and the writing not heightened by any laboured scenes:  and, without attempting to contradict this modest description, we may dismiss the tragedy of “Amboyna.”  It was dedicated to Lord Clifford of Chudleigh, an active member of the Cabal administration of Charles II.; but who, as a Catholic, on the test act being passed, resigned his post of lord high treasurer, and died shortly afterwards.  There is great reason to think that this nobleman had essentially favoured Dryden’s views in life.  On a former occasion, he had termed Lord Clifford a better Maecenas than that of Horace;[27] and, in the present dedication, he mentions the numerous favours received through so many years as forming one continued act of his patron’s generosity and goodness; so that the excess of his gratitude had led the poet to receive those benefits, as the Jews received their law, with mute wonder, rather than with outward and ceremonious acclamation.  These sentiments of obligation he continued, long after Lord Clifford’s death, to express in terms equally glowing;[28] so that we may safely do this statesman’s memory the justice to record him as an active and discerning patron of Dryden’s genius.