[On prefaces in general.]

... nor do I find that the Antient Poets, or any of most repute of our Modern, assumed this kind of vindication to themselves; though perhaps they might have done it, with more assurance of success, then any that now most confidently undertake it; either as they contemn'd the impotent censures and cavils, that were spread against their performances, or else a judicious confirmation in themselves, that their works were the best defiances that could be given their Enemies.

Not that I judge our unimitable Johnson, or those wonders of Wit, Beaumont and Fletcher, were without their failings, or that in some things, their Plays were not questionable, as well as ours; though I could wish our Muses were so happily adorned, as their spots and beauties appear together: and I doubt it may be truly affirmed, that in the greatest of their failings, they fell more below themselves, then beneath us; which gives us some caution not to be too busie with their faults.

It is one thing to be excellent, and another to be absolutely perfect; the Diamond doth require some polishing, though of most commendable figure and brightness: The like may be said of these excellent Poets, their thoughts were always pretious, though not alike polished and set off by themselves.

Most men are naturally inclin'd to give to Antiquity its due respects, and there is some reason for it (if no more) in that we must be old ourselves; but he were weakly an admirer of times past, that by an over dotage on them, would continue himself in a Childhood of knowledge; since that were to go backward with ingenuity, as we set too forward theirs, they have their fame, and we must expect ours; though at present they challenge so long a prescription, that until ours does number more then the three parts of an age, in equal repute with theirs. I make some doubt whether the best Rhime, or Reason, that the Stage is now beholding to, will establish us as great in the judgment of those who shall succeed us; which, as I am far from assuming it to my self, in behalf of any undertaking of mine, so I shall as unwillingly allow it to the boldest of Pretenders; besides this, we are obliged in so great a measure to those great Artificers of Invention, and Wit, by which they raised our Stage to its former glory, as also in a high degree for those excellent rules and observations, which (if well heeded) cannot but improve our endeavours in this kind, and from whom (if we do well) it is impossible to differ so far, as to declare them Enemies, and like the example of the Trojan Hero, to erect a Trophee and superscribe on it,

[Howard turns to his own play.]

... having made my self so far a party on the side of our former Poets, that I have composed this Play in some resemblance to theirs of the like nature. which in my judgment I have esteemed best. I have given it the name likewise of Tragi-Comedy, as I find they have done some of theirs, which I need not particularize to the Reader, because they are well enough known to be at this day no inconsiderable ornament and entertainment of the Stage; not that I will undertake to justifiethe word (since every Play, if strictly taken, must be either Tragedy or Comedy, excluding Farce, which does not so much as deserve a Dramatis Personae to be set before it, as we shall soon manifest). And it was doubtless created by former Poets, who finding that mixt Plays were very sutable to the English Stage, and that it was somewhat below the denomination of their Heroicks to call them simply Comedies (which as they are corruptly understood, imply, little more then scurrility and laughter, though of far greater dignity, if rightly apply'd) They allow'd them the names of Tragi-Comedies, & I do not find but the highest of our English Tragedies (as Cataline, The Maids Tragedy, Rollo, The Cardinal and Traytor ) considerable enough to be rank'd with the best of these, are at all undervalued by their Authors, in being sweetned with mirth; for as all people do not come purposely to sympathize their passions with those of the Plays, so some will expect to be diverted accordingly; nor do I believe that it is less natural (as some have thought) to form a Play, that shall have this variety of Genius, then I do to find of mankind some grave, reserv'd, fierce, cruel, others of more aiery and pleasant converse, to mingle humours and affairs together.

(sig. A3v-4)

[Discussing the use of rhymed verse in plays, and having quoted approvingly from Underwoods, 29, on the subject.]

... whensoever Verse was us'd by Ben Johnson, as it is in Sylla's Ghost, or scatter'd in some places in Sejanus ; I cannot but observe his Art and Nature together, in not confining the periods of sense and Rhime together (as is too much us'd now) but most commonly by carrying the sense of one verse into part of another, which elevates the stile of Verse (as is to be seen in Virgil) and without which it will never shew so like Prose, and proper for Dialogue, as it ought to do; an example to be worthily imitated by such as will write in Verse, to whose consideration I presume to commend it.

(sigs. a1r-v)

Words are the children of thought, and man must be granted to have first imagined speech, before he could express any conception of his by words; so that thought, was both the primitive ground, andglory of Tongues, which successively came to be more improved; and doubtless it was the Wit of Poets that (above all) refin'd their own languages; so that I wonder to find it affirmed, that Ben Johnson (who had such a soul of thought) did by Translating beautifie our Tongue; as if his ingenuity was not to be allowed the glory of doing far more by its single strength. I should be loth to wish any so ill, as that he were alive to answer the imputation; however, I could be well content, that such as make him their president in Translating from others, could dispose of it so well, and that they had like wise as much Wit, and Learning besides.

Translating, may I grant, adds some perfection to a language, because it introduces the wit of others into its own words, as the French have of late done well in theirs; and we have pretty well requited their kindness to us, in rendring so much of theirs in ours; but where I can make use of good Originals, I shall be more sparing of my esteem of Copies, and I dare averre, that the Ingenuities of Johnson, Beaumont, and Fletcher, with some other of our former Poets, left our language more improved, as it expressed their thoughts, then if the best of Italian, Spanish, and French Wit, had been Translated by the greatest of Pens. I wish it be our good fortune (for the benefit of future times) to leave our Tongue as much inlarged and imbellished, as they left it to us.

(sig. a3v-4r)

... For as in the characters of Tragedy there will be some violent in love, others haughty, rash, and turbulent, above what is ordinary to be observed in men; so Comedy will have its extravagancies (besides many more) in morose, heedless, timorous and foolish persons, which are images of the like contrary effects of nature; in like manner, the designs and adventures depending on these, have their proportions; for as Dramatick characters will have some remoteness from the ordinary actions of men, so must their undertakings be sutable; wherefore I wonder to find it affirmed, that extravagancies of actions should be fixed on Farce, (which is rather an entertainment of Mimikry, than a Play in any kind) since Plays must not be so even, as to represent nothing above nature, which were to make them more reasonable, then Poetical; besides, it is a commendable license (especially in Poetry) to represent what is rather useful to know, (as it seems actually done) then the possibility of it, so it provide well for our manners; as we see in Comedies, where we are taught from the mouths of Fools, and by such extravagancies as are in some kind impossible to be supposed, how we may become the wiser; why else did our learned Johnson compleat that great work of his Alchymist , with such persons that continue a prosecution of extravagancy of humour or impossibility together, (except the making of the Philosophers Stone be held a known truth) or that his Dol Common representing the Queen of Fairies, was not to pass upon the weak capacity of Dapper deceived by it? The same may be affirmed of his Cynthias Revells, where Cupid, Mercury, and Eccho have parts, or somewhat more extraordinary in his Devil's an Ass, where the grand Demon, and a lesser, are made characters, as Satyrical Reflections on Vanity and Vice, to be corrected by them; which shews, that the truth or possibility of the characters, is less to be considered, then the Morality they aim at. Et hercule omnis salsa dicendi ratio in eo est, ut aliter quam est rectum verumque dicatur   as Quintilian observes.

(sig. b2v-3r)

[On the proper use of 'vulgar' characters in comedy.]

... here I cannot chuse but reflect on our mean imitation of French Plays, by introducing of servants and waiting women to have parts, without being essential characters; an error well avoided by our former writers, who never admitted any, otherwise then as messengers and attendants, except on the account of being characters, as is to be seen by Numphs in Bartholomew Fair, and Face in the Alchymist ; the latter of which (notwithstanding what can be objected against him) may deservedly be granted one of the best parts on our English Stage.

(sig. b4)