As he was obnoxious to all parties, Lord Danby would probably have been made a sacrifice, had not the disturbances, which arose from the various plots of the time, turned the attention of his enemies to other subjects.  He was liberated in 1683-4, survived the Revolution, was created Duke of Leeds, and died in 1712.  His character was of the most decided kind; he was fertile in expedients and had always something new to substitute for those which failed; a faculty highly acceptable to Charles, who loved to be relieved even were it but in idea, from the labour of business, and the pressure of difficulty.  In other points, he was probably not very scrupulous, since even Dryden found cause to say at length, that

     Danby’s matchless impudence
     Helped to support the knave.

2.  This alludes to the stop of payments in exchequer, in 1671-2; a
   desperate measure recommended by Clifford, to secure money for the
   war against Holland.

3.  The Earl of Lindsey was general in chief for King Charles I. at the
   breaking out of the civil war.  As an evil omen of the royal cause,
   he was mortally wounded and made prisoner at the battle of
   Edgehill, the very first which was fought betwixt the king and
   parliament.  Clarendon says, “He had very many friends, and very few
   enemies, and died generally lamented.”  His son Montague Bertie,
   Earl of Lindsey, was a sufferer in the same cause.  Lord Danby was
   married to the Lady Bridget, the second daughter of that nobleman.

PREFACE.

The death of Antony and Cleopatra is a subject which has been treated by the greatest wits of our nation, after Shakespeare; and by all so variously, that their example has given me the confidence to try myself in this bow of Ulysses amongst the crowd of shooters; and, withal, to take my own measures, in aiming at the mark.  I doubt not but the same motive has prevailed with all of us in this attempt; I mean the excellency of the moral:  For the chief persons represented, were famous patterns of unlawful love; and their end accordingly was unfortunate.  All reasonable men have long since concluded, that the hero of the poem ought not to be a character of perfect virtue, for then he could not, without injustice, be made unhappy; nor yet altogether wicked, because he could not then be pitied.  I have therefore steered the middle course; and have drawn the character of Antony as favourably as Plutarch, Appian, and Dion Cassius would give me leave; the like I have observed in Cleopatra.  That which is wanting to work up the pity to a greater heighth, was not afforded me by the story; for the crimes of love, which they both committed, were not occasioned by any necessity, or fatal ignorance, but were wholly voluntary; since our passions are, or ought to be, within our power.  The fabric of the play is regular enough, as to the