Defence of Poesie (29-31)

Now to that which commonly is attributed to the praise of Historie, in respect of the notable learning, is got by marking the successe, as though therein a man shuld see vertue exalted, & vice punished: truly that commendation is peculier to Poetrie, and farre off from Historie ; for indeed Poetrie euer sets vertue so out in her best cullours, making fortune her well-wayting handmayd, that one must needs be enamoured of her. Well may you see Vlisses in a storme and in other hard plights, but they are but exercises of patience & magnanimitie, to make them shine the more in the neare following prosperitie. And of the contrary part, if euill men come to the stage, they euer goe out (as the Tragedie writer answered to one that misliked the shew of such persons) so manicled as they litle animate folkes to follow them. But the Historie beeing captiued to the trueth of a foolish world, is many times a terror from well-doing, and an encouragement to vnbrideled wickednes. For see we not valiant Milciades rot in his fetters ? The iust Phocion and the accomplished Socrates, put to death like Traytors? The cruell Seuerus, liue prosperously? The excellent Seuerus miserably murthered? Sylla and Marius dying in their beds? Pompey and Cicero slain then when they wold haue thought exile happinesse? See we not vertuous Cato driuen to kill himselfe, and Rebell Cæsar so aduanced, that his name yet after 1600 yeares lasteth in the highest honor? And marke but euen Cæsars owne words of the forenamed Sylla, (who in that onely, did honestly to put downe his dishonest Tyrannie) Litteras nesciuit: as if want of learning caused him to doo well. He ment it not by Poetrie, which not content with earthly plagues, deuiseth new punishments in hell for Tyrants: nor yet by Philosophy, which teacheth Occidentos esse, but no doubt by skill in History, for that indeed can affoord you Cipselus, Periander, Phalaris, Dionisius, and I know not how many more of the same kennell, that speed well inough in their abhominable iniustice of vsurpation.

I conclude therfore that he excelleth historie, not onely in furnishing the minde with knowledge, but in setting it forward to that which deserues to be called and accounted good: which setting forward and mouing to well doing, indeed setteth the Lawrell Crowne vpon the Poets as victorious, not onely of the Historian, but ouer the Philosopher, howsoeuer in teaching it may be questionable. For suppose it be granted, that which I suppose with great reason may be denied, that the Philosopher in respect of his methodical proceeding, teach more perfectly then the Poet, yet do I thinke, that no man is so much philophilosothos, as to compare the Philosopher in moouing with the Poet. And that moouing is of a higher degree then teaching, it may by this appeare, that it is well nigh both the cause and effect of teaching. For who will be taught, if hee be not mooued with desire to be taught? And what so much good doth that teaching bring foorth, (I speake still of morall doctrine) as that it mooueth one to do that which it doth teach.

For as Aristotle saith, it is not γνώσις, but πράξις must be the frute: and how πράξις can be without being moued to practise, it is no hard matter to consider. The Philosopher sheweth you the way, hee enformeth you of the particularities, as well of the tediousnes of the way, as of the pleasaunt lodging you shall haue when your iourney is ended, as of the many by turnings that may diuert you from your way. But this is to no man but to him that will reade him, and reade him with attentiue studious painfulnesse, which constant desire, whosoeuer hath in him, hath alreadie past halfe the hardnesse of the way: and therefore is beholding to the Philosopher, but for the other halfe. Nat truly learned men haue learnedly thought, that where once reason hath so much ouer-mastered passion, as that the minde hath a free desire to doo well, the inward light each minde hath in it selfe, is as good as a Philosophers booke, since in Nature we know it is well, to doo well, and what is well, and what is euill, although not in the wordes of Art which Philosophers bestow vppon vs: for out of naturall conceit the Philosophers drew it ; but to be moued to doo that which wee know, or to be mooued with desire to know. Hoc opus, hic labor est.