“Aureng-Zebe” was his first performance after the failure of the “Assignation.”  It was acted in 1675 with general applause.  “Aureng-Zebe” is a heroic, or rhyming play, but not cast in a mould quite so romantic as the “Conquest of Granada.”  There is a grave and moral turn in many of the speeches, which brings it nearer the style of a French tragedy.  It is true, the character of Moral borders upon extravagance; but a certain licence has been always given to theatrical tyrants, and we excuse bombast in him more readily than in Almanzor.  There is perhaps some reason for this indulgence.  The possession of unlimited power, vested in active and mercurial characters, naturally drives them to an extravagant indulgence of passion, bordering upon insanity; and it follows, that their language must outstrip the modesty of nature.  Propriety of diction in the drama is relative, and to be referred more to individual character than to general rules:  to make a tyrant sober-minded is to make a madman rational.  But this discretion must be used with great caution by the writer, lest he should confound the terrible with the burlesque.  Two great actors, Kynaston and Booth, differed in their style of playing Morat.

The former, who was the original performer, and doubtless had his instructions from the author, gave full force to the sentiments of avowed and barbarous vainglory, which mark the character.  When he is determined to spare Aureng-Zebe, and Nourmahal pleads,

  “Twill not be safe to let him live an hour,”

Kynaston gave all the stern and haughty insolence of despotism to his answer,

  “I’ll do’t to show my arbitrary power."[24]

But Booth, with modest caution, avoided marking and pressing upon the audience a sentiment hovering between the comic and terrible, however consonant to the character by whom it was delivered.  The principal incident in “Aureng-Zebe” was suggested by King Charles himself.  The tragedy is dedicated to Mulgrave, whose patronage had been so effectual, as to introduce Dryden and his poetical schemes to the peculiar notice of the king and duke.  The dedication and the prologue of this piece throw considerable light upon these plans, as well as upon the revolution which had gradually taken place in Dryden’s dramatic taste.

During the space which occurred between writing the “Conquest of Granada” and “Aureng-Zebe”, our author’s researches into the nature and causes of harmony of versification been unremitted, and he had probably already collected the materials of his intended English Prosodia.  Besides this labour, he had been engaged in a closer and more critical examination of the ancient English poets, than he had before bestowed upon them.  These studies seem to have led Dryden to two conclusions:  first, that the drama ought to be emancipated from the fetters of rhyme; and secondly, that he ought to employ the system of versification, which he had now perfected, to the more legitimate purpose of epic poetry.  Each of these opinions merits consideration.