into Poorness of Thought by aiming too much at the Probability and neglecting the Admirable; whereby he loses that agreeableness which is a mixture of both.  He ought then to take more care than some have done, not to keep himself too long behind the Scenes, and trust the Narration with another, which, without a great deal of Art and Pains, will take off much of the Life of the Work, as Longinus has already formerly observed.

And here come in the Qualities of Narration, mentioned in our Definition, that it ought to be done in a manner probable, agreeable, and admirable; ’tis rendered probable by its Simplicity and Singularity, and admirable by the Grandeur of the Subject, the Figures and Machines, or [Greek:  theoi apo mechanes], much more lawful here than in the Drama’s; and lastly agreeable, as has been said, by a mixture of both.

The last thing in our Definition, is, the End of Epic, indeed the first and principal which ought to be intended, and that’s Instruction, not only, as Rapin thinks, of great Men, but of all, as in Virgil’s Scheme, which we have already described; and, this either by the principal Moral aim’d at in the whole, or the Manners of particular Persons.  Of Fable and Moral, I’ve already discours’d, and whether be the more lively and probable way to instruct, by that or History.  But here it may be worth the while to enquire, whether the principal Hero in Epic ought to be virtuous?  Bossu thinks not, the manners being formed as well by seeing Errors as Beauties in the chief Actors; but yet methinks it seems too much to form a Hero that’s a perfect Almanzor, with not one spark of Vertue, and only remarkable for his extraordinary Strength and little Brains; such was certainly Homer’s Achilles, of whom I think the Father was in the right when he observes, the Poet makes him not do one brave or virtuous Action, all the while he lies before the Town:  whereas Virgil’s Hero, is, to tell truth, an indifferent good Heathen, and, bating one or two slips, comes up pretty well to his own good word.  The same however may be said for Homer, which our present Dramatists plead for their Excuse; that he copied his Hero from those who were esteemed such in the barbarous Age in which he liv’d,

  Impiger, iracundus, inexorabllis, acer,
  Jura neget sibi nata, &c.

Made up of Lewdness, Love, and Fighting:  who, had he liv’d in our Days, would have made an excellent Town Bully, I wish there were not too much reason to say a modish Gentleman.  But tho’ old Homer took this way, Virgil, who writes with much more Judgment and Exactness, and follows him in many things, here thought fit to leave him; making his Hero, as I’ve said, not only brave and prudent, but for the most part virtuous.  Which would much better form the manners of his Reader, than if they were set to spell out Instruction from contraries, as Homer has done.  Whence it follows, the more virtuous a Hero is, the better; since he more effectually