Another objection to OEdipus has been derived from the doctrine of fatalism, inculcated by the story.  There is something of cant in talking much upon the influence of a theatre on public morals; yet, I fear, though the most moral plays are incapable of doing much good, the turn of others may make a mischievous impression, by embodying in verse, and rendering apt for the memory, maxims of an impious or profligate tendency.  In this point of view, there is, at least, no edification in beholding the horrible crimes unto which OEdipus is unwillingly plunged, and in witnessing the dreadful punishment he sustains, though innocent of all moral or intentional guilt, Corneille has endeavoured to counterbalance the obvious conclusion, by a long tirade upon free-will, which I have subjoined, as it contains some striking ideas.[4] But the doctrine, which it expresses, is contradictory of the whole tenor of the story; and the correct deduction is much more justly summed up by Seneca, in the stoical maxim of necessity: 

Fatis agimur, cedite Fatis; Non solicitae possunt curae, Mutare rati stamina fusi; Quicquid patimur mortale genus, Quicquid facimus venit ex alto; Servatque sua decreta colus, Lachesis dura revoluta manu.

Some degree of poetical justice might have been preserved, and a valuable moral inculcated, had the conduct of OEdipus, in his combat with Laius, been represented as atrocious, or, at least, unwarrantable; as the sequel would then have been a warning, how impossible it is to calculate the consequences or extent of a single act of guilt.  But, after all, Dryden perhaps extracts the true moral, while stating our insufficiency to estimate the distribution of good and evil in human life, in a passage, which, in excellent poetry, expresses more sound truth, than a whole shelf of philosophers: 

  The Gods are just—­
  But how can finite measure infinite? 
  Reason! alas, it does not know itself! 
  Yet man, vain man, would, with this, short-lined plummet,
  Fathom the vast abyss of heavenly justice. 
  Whatever is, is in its causes just,
  Since all things are by fate.  But purblind man
  Sees but a part o’the chain; the nearest links;
  His eyes not carrying to that equal beam,
  That poises all above.—­

The prologue states, that the play, if damned, may be recorded as the “first buried since the Woollen Act.”  This enables us to fix the date of the performance.  By the 30th Charles II. cap. 3. all persons were appointed to be buried in woollen after 1st August, 1678.  The play must therefore have been represented early in the season 1678-9.  It was not printed until 1679.

Footnotes: 
1.  Nero is said to have represented the character of OEdipus, amongst
   others of the same horrible cast.—­Suetonius, Lib.  VI.  Cap. 21.

2.  Thus Seneca is justly ridiculed by Dacier, for sending Laius forth
   with a numerous party of guards, to avoid the indecorum of a king
   going abroad too slenderly attended.  The guards lose their way
   within a league of their master’s capital; and, by this awkward
   contrivance, their absence is accounted for, when he is met by
   OEdipus.