class="i2">And Goddess-like retains her State
When down again she flies.

The Passage, taken out of the Spectator, could not relate to Gildon, because of the French Cant, which he did not affect, nor understand. It is plain therefore, it must refer to the Critick upon Cato; which shews us, that as conscious as the most modest Man may be of his own Insufficiency; yet, when it is in Dispute, he cannot always preserve his Insensibility. Cato is a very good Dramatick Poem, and so was the Cid; yet the best Critick that ever was written in French, was that upon the Cid, as La Bruyere observes.

In another of the Spectators, we meet with something which proves to us, that a Man may have as much Modesty as Mr. Addison; and yet be very jealous of losing any Part of the Glory which is due to him. Every one knows, that though he was a Master of Eloquence, he never attempted to speak in Parliament, but it was with some Confusion; and what he said, did not answer the Expectation which had been raised by the Character of his Writings. Himself takes notice of this, not as an Infirmity, but as the Effect of Caution and Art. Spectator, N^o 231, Cicero tells us, that he never liked an Orator, who did not appear in some little Confusion at the Beginning of his Speech; and confesses, that he himself never entered upon an Oration without Trembling and Concern. It is indeed a Kind of Deference which is due to a great Assembly. The bravest Man often appears timorous upon these Occasions, as we may observe that there is generally no Creature more impudent than a Coward. I hope I shall not be thought invidious, or to endeavour to lessen the Veneration, which all, who love polite Learning, owe to the Memory of the Spectator; yet I could not but take notice, how sensible the most Discreet are in Point of Rivalship in Fame. What else can one think of the Spectator's Saying in the Dedication of the Eighth Volume: I need not tell you, that the free and disengaged Behaviour of a fine Gentleman, makes as many aukward Beaux, as the Easiness of your Favourite Waller hath made insipid Poets. Though the fine Gentleman may be applied to Mr. Waller, and the aukward Beaux to the insipid Poets; yet the Comparison cannot hold, without doing an Injury to Mr. Waller's Merit. The Beaux may be aukward, by imitating what you call a fine Gentleman, who is generally distinguish'd by some Affectation; but no Poet can be insipid by imitating Mr. Waller's Easiness, if he has any Portion of his Wit and Gallantry. The Spectator's Manner was not very different from Mr. Waller's, as to Easiness; and I have as often heard it wished, that there was more Fire in his own Poetry, as that there was more in Mr. Waller's. Two of the politest Authors in Europe, of the last Age, St. Evremont and La Fontaine, had such an Esteem for Mr. Waller, that it is strange he meets with no better Quarter at Home. Those two famous French Wits us'd to call him another Anacreon; and the Criticks have not yet complained, that ever Anacreon taught any Poet to be insipid. Mr. Addison is so far from thinking that Waller had any such Infection about him, that he wishes he had lived to have sung in Praise of King William, the sublimest Subject that ever was offered to a Muse, by how much the Deliverer of Nations from Slavery is a more godlike Character, than to have subjected and enslaved them, as did Alexander and Cæsar.

So little Danger is there of learning to be insipid by imitating Waller, that he is praised by the Editor of St. Evremond's Works, for the Elevation of his Genius, Mr. Edmond Waller; s'est generallement fait admirer par l'Elevation de son Esprit.

I do not in this Essay aim at any Thing more, than, as I have said before, to put several critical Hints, which I had collected, together, and not to form a regular Discourse, but take them as they come in my way.

If the Spectator, by the Passage above-mentioned, insinuates that a Man must be able to perform himself in an Art, to be a good Judge of the Performances of others; consequently, that I ought to be a masterly Historian, to make Remarks on Mr. Echard's History, he divests me at once of the Right I pretend to in the following Treatise. Let us therefore enquire into the Reason of this Reflection.

Horace, whom no English Author could understand better than the Spectator, as appears by his admirable Translation, teaches us otherwise,

Dacier's Notes upon Hippocrates, as I have been informed by my worthy Friend Dr. Allen, are much better than any others, though made by Men of the Faculty, which Dacier did not profess. Monsieur Corneille, the greatest Genius in France for Tragedy, wrote Examens of his Pieces, which, like Dryden's Prefaces, were adapted to the several Tragedies, and very often clashed with one another, as the Subject required: but because he would prevent as much as possible any Attack of Criticism, he declares in one of his Discourses, That the Knowledge which is acquired by Study and Speculation, is of little or no Use without Experience. Thus an Author must produce a Tragedy himself, before he presumes to criticise on another's. If it be the same Thing in History too, I began at the wrong End, and should have written three or four Folio Histories, before I had presum'd to make Remarks on Archdeacon Echard's, this would bear very hard upon me, and I must beg Leave to enquire a little whether the Case be really so or not.

Monsieur Dacier is so far from being of Corneille's Opinion, that he thinks a Man who never did write a Tragedy, may criticise on another's Poem the better for that he never wrote himself. Nay, I do not know, says he in his Preface to Aristotle, whether he who has written Dramatick poems,