In the following tragedy, Dryden has avowedly adopted the Greek model; qualified, however, by the under plot of Adrastus and Eurydice, which contributes little either to the effect or merit of the play.  Creon, in his ambition and his deformity, is a poor copy of Richard III., without his abilities; his plots and treasons are baffled by the single appearance of OEdipus; and as for the loves and woes of Eurydice, and the prince of Argos, they are lost in the horrors of the principal story, like the moonlight amid the glare of a conflagration.  In other respects, the conduct of the piece closely follows the “OEdipus Tyrannus,” and, in some respects, even improves on that excellent model.  The Tiresias of Sophocles, for example, upon his first introduction, denounces OEdipus as the slayer of Laius, braves his resentment, and prophesies his miserable catastrophe.  In Dryden’s play, the first anathema of the prophet is levelled only against the unknown murderer; and it is not till the powers of hell have been invoked, that even the eye of the prophet can penetrate the horrible veil, and fix the guilt decisively upon OEdipus.  By this means, the striking quarrel betwixt the monarch and Tiresias is, with great art, postponed to the third act; and the interest, of course, is more gradually heightened than in the Grecian tragedy.

The first and third acts, which were wholly written by Dryden, maintain a decided superiority over the rest of the piece.  Yet there are many excellent passages scattered through Lee’s scenes; and as the whole was probably corrected by Dryden, the tragedy has the appearance of general consistence and uniformity.  There are several scenes, in which Dryden seems to have indulged his newly adopted desire of imitating the stile of Shakespeare.  Such are, in particular, the scene of OEdipus walking in his sleep, which bears marks of Dryden’s pen; and such, also, is the incantation in the third act.  Seneca and Corneille have thrown this last scene into narrative.  Yet, by the present large size of our stages, and the complete management of light and shade, the incantation might be represented with striking effect; an advantage which, I fear, has been gained by the sacrifice of others, much more essential to the drama, considered as a dignified and rational amusement.  The incantation itself is nobly written, and the ghost of Laius can only be paralleled in Shakespeare.

The language of OEdipus is, in general, nervous, pure, and elegant; and the dialogue, though in so high a tone of passion, is natural and affecting.  Some of Lee’s extravagancies are lamentable exceptions to this observation.  This may be instanced in the passage, where Jocasta threatens to fire Olympus, destroy the heavenly furniture, and smoke the deities like bees out of their ambrosial hives; and such is the still more noted wish of OEdipus;

  Through all the inmost chambers of the sky,
  May there not be a glimpse, one starry spark,
  But gods meet gods, and jostle in the dark!