NOTES

Introduction: On Writing the History of Early English Criticism 1. See George Saintsbury, “From the Renaissance to the Decline of Eighteenth Century Orthodoxy,” Vol. 2 of A History of Criticism and Literary Taste in Europe, 3 vols. (Edinburgh: William Blackwood, 1900–04). 2. Introduction to The Later Eighteenth Century, Vol. 1 of René Wellek, A History of Modern Criticism: 1750–1950 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1955). 3. Terry Eagleton, The Function of Criticism: From The Spectator to Post-Structuralism (London: Verso, 1984). Other notable overviews include: J. W. H. Atkins, English Literary Criticism: 17 th and 18th Centuries (London: Methuen, 1951); George Watson, The Literary Critics: A Study of English Descriptive Criticism, rev. ed. (London: Hogarth Press, 1986); and James Engell, Forming the Critical Mind: Dryden to Coleridge (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989). Perhaps the most comprehensive survey is The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism: The Eighteenth Century, ed. H. B. Nisbet and Claude Rawson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997); but, because of its scope—it covers both English and Continental criti- cism from 1670 to 1800—its chapters on individual genres and topics are nec- essarily brief. The only recent, book-length work that problematizes our understanding of the criticism of this period is Philip Smallwood’s Reconstructing Criticism: Pope’s Essay on Criticism and the Logic of Definition (Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press, 2003). See also Paul Trolander and Zeynep Tenger, “Criticism Against Itself: Subverting Critical Authority in Late-Seventeenth- Century England,” Philological Quarterly 75 (1996): 311–38, and “ ‘Impartial Critick’ or ‘Muse’s Handmaid’: The Politics of Critical Practice in the Early Eighteenth Century,” Essays in Literature 21 (1994): 26–42. 4. Richard Burt, Licensed by Authority: Ben Jonson and the Discourses of Censorship (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993); Richard Dutton, Ben Jonson: Authority: Criticism (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1996); Robert D. Hume, Dryden’s Criticism (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1970); Edward Pechter, Dryden’s Classical Theory of Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975); Michael Werth Gelber, The Just and the Lively: The Literary Criticism of John Dryden (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999). 184 NOTES

5. The Critical Works of Thomas Rymer, ed. and intro. Curt A. Zimansky (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1956); The Critical Works of John Dennis, ed. Edward Niles Hooker, 2 vols. (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press, 1939, 1943). 6. Samuel Johnson’s “Preface to Dryden” first appeared in Vol. 3 of Prefaces, Biographical and Critical, to the Works of the English Poets (1779). 7. Johnson, Lives of the English Poets, ed. George Birkbeck Hill, 3 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1905) 1:410. 8. The Works of John Dryden, ed. Edward Niles Hooker, H. T. Swedenberg, Jr., et al., 20 vols. (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1956–2002) 9:4. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to Dryden’s works are from this edition, and will hereafter be cited paren- thetically in the text by volume and page number. 9. Gelber begins his book-length study of Dryden’s criticism by announcing, “John Dryden is the father of English literary criticism,” The Just and the Lively 1. Dryden’s paternalistic role in the early history of English criticism is also central to Marcie Frank’s thesis in Gender, Theatre, and the Origins of Criticism: From Dryden to Manley (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), where she examines the influence of Dryden’s criticism on Aphra Behn, Catharine Trotter, and Delarivier Manley. 10. Critical Works of Thomas Rymer 136. All references to Rymer are from this edition, and will hereafter be cited parenthetically in the text. 11. Letter to the Earl of Dorset (late summer or early autumn, 1677), The Letters of John Dryden, ed. Charles E. Ward (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1942) 13–14. According to Zimansky, Tragedies of the Last Age “was licensed July 17, 1677, and advertised in the Term Catalogues for Michaelmas of that year. . .so the title page was consider- ably postdated” (193). 12. Of Dramatic Poesy and Other Critical Essays, ed. and intro. George Watson, 2 vols. (London: Dent, 1962) 1:211. Similarly, in The Literary Critics, Watson accuses Dryden of engaging in “some disagreeable boot-licking of Rymer” (51). 13. R. S. Crane, “On Writing the History of Criticism in England, 1650–1800,” in The Idea of the Humanities, 2 vols. (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1967) 2:162. 14. Pat Rogers, Grub Street: Studies in a Subculture (London: Methuen, 1972). A distilled version of this book appeared as Hacks and Dunces: Pope, Swift and Grub Street (London: Methuen, 1980). 15. For a similar critique, see Brean S. Hammond, Professional Imaginative Writing in England, 1670–1740: “Hackney for Bread” (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997) 2–3. 16. See Burt, chapter 1: “Branding the Body, Burning the Book,” particularly pp. 30–5; Douglas Lane Patey, “The institution of criticism in the eigh- teenth century,” in The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism: The Eighteenth Century, 3–31; and Smallwood, Reconstructing Criticism. 17. Peter Uwe Hohendahl, “Literary Criticism and the Public Sphere,” in The Institution of Criticism (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1982) 52. NOTES 185

18. See Matthew J. Kinservik, “Theatrical Regulation during the Restoration Period,” in A Companion to Restoration Drama, ed. Susan J. Owen (Oxford: Blackwell, 2001) 36–52. 19. On this topic, see Kinservik, “Censorship and Generic Change: The Case of Satire on the Early Eighteenth-Century London Stage,” Philological Quarterly 78 (1999): 259–82. 20. On the impact of the Collier controversy on the London theater world—or lack thereof—see Hume, “Jeremy Collier and the Future of the London Theater in 1698,” Studies in Philology 96 (1999): 480–511. 21. This genre is identified early on by the author of A Description of the Academy of the Athenian Virtuosi (1673), who dismisses it as an illegitimate form of criticism: “the Burlesque way of writing is the most hopeful to abuse a good Author, since the fantastick dress tickles the Reader, and makes him laugh whether he will or no” (34). 22. For an excellent survey of pre-1660 English criticism, see English Renaissance Literary Criticism, ed. Brian Vickers (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2001). 23. Mark Rose, Authors and Owners: The Invention of Copyright (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993).

Chapter 1 The Author as Critic: Prefatory Criticism from Jonson to Dryden 1. See, for example, William K. Wimsatt, Jr. and Cleanth Brooks, Literary Criticism: A Short History (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1957) and Engell, Forming the Critical Mind: Dryden to Coleridge. In a refreshing change of pace, the editors of The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism: The Eighteenth Century deliberately avoid devoting “separate chapters to academic or institutional aspects of critical activity, or to the careers of individual critics” (xviii). 2. In particular, see Dutton, Ben Jonson: Authority: Criticism. 3. For example, Gelber concludes his study of Dryden’s criticism by claiming, “No other [English critic] demonstrates so well the interconnections between sound criticism and great literature; and the demonstration by him is all the more impressive since he was simultaneously both poet and critic” (255). 4. Indeed, Jonson’s achievements here have earned him the title of “father”: according to Richard C. Newton, “Of this Ben Jonson, the (re-)inventor of the book, the first English classical author, virtually all subsequent English authors can claim at least some degree of paternity,” “Jonson and the (Re-)Invention of the Book,” in Classic and Cavalier: Essays on Jonson and the Sons of Ben, ed. Claude J. Summers and Ted-Larry Pebworth (Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1982) 46. 5. This is most clearly evident in Ben Jonson’s Literary Criticism, ed. James D. Redwine, Jr. (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1970), where Jonson’s critical writing is taken out of context and treated as a cohesive critical project. 186 NOTES

6. See Vickers’s anthology, English Renaissance Literary Criticism, and David Klein, The Elizabethan Dramatists as Critics (New York: Philosophical Library, 1963). 7. J. W. Saunders, “The Stigma of Print: A Note on the Social Bases of Tudor Poetry,” Essays in Criticism 1 (1951): 139–64. 8. Kevin Dunn, Pretexts of Authority: The Rhetoric of Authorship in the Renaissance Preface (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1994) 6. 9. How exactly play publication—pirated or otherwise—affected play performance and acting companies is the subject of much debate. Peter W. M. Blayney argues that play publication was not profitable enough to warrant pirating, “The Publication of Playbooks,” in A New History of Early English Drama, ed. John D. Cox and David Scott Kastan (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997) 383–422. Dutton notes that there are very few recorded instances of a theater company “stealing” the property of another, probably because of the risk of running afoul of the Master of the Revels, “The Birth of the Author,” in Texts and Cultural Change in Early Modern England, ed. Cedric C. Brown and Arthur F. Marotti (London: Macmillan, 1997) 153–78. But Paulina Kewes argues that there is still evidence suggest- ing that the companies “saw publication as inimical to their commercial interests,” Authorship and Appropriation: Writing for the Stage in England, 1660–1710 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998) 20–3. 10. See Gerald Eades Bentley, The Profession of Dramatist in Shakespeare’s Time, 1590–1642 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1971) 275–9. 11. Because my argument focuses on typography, the (often unusual) placement of extraliterary material, and changes that occur between different editions of the same play, I have, unless otherwise indicated, cited the original quarto or folio editions even when a modern edition exists. As evidenced in the Oxford edition of Jonson’s works, modern editors often relegate extraliterary matter to footnotes or an appendix, where it is easily missed by the reader. 12. For a brief discussion of the induction in late sixteenth- and early seventeenth-century English drama, see Ben Jonson, ed. C. H. Herford, Percy Simpson, and Evelyn Simpson, 11 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925–52) 9:406–8. According to the Oxford editors, inductions were considered passé by 1607. 13. See Richmond Barbour, “The Elizabethan Jonson in Print,” Criticism 34 (1992): 317–26. Barbour is primarily interested in the difference between Jonson’s early attempts at self-presentation in relation to the 1616 folio, but he does not compare Jonson’s extraliterary self-presentation to that of the original playscript. 14. See W. David Kay, “The Shaping of Ben Jonson’s Career: A Reexamination of Facts and Problems,” Modern Philology 67 (1970): 229 and Barbour, “Elizabethan Jonson” 320–1. 15. Barbour, “Elizabethan Jonson” 323. 16. Several scholars have suggested that Sejanus is similar to Jonson’s earlier satirical works in that it is a play about the problems of authority and interpretation. John Gordon Sweeney III identifies Tiberius as Jonson’s NOTES 187

authorial spokesperson, and regards the Germanicans as “functioning exactly like the satiric commentators of the comical satires,” Jonson and the Psychology of Public Theater (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985) 50–1. See also George E. Rowe, Distinguishing Jonson: Imitation, Rivalry, and the Direction of a Dramatic Career (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1988) 93–102. 17. Scholars have frequently observed that, after the publication of Sejanus, Jonson’s attitude toward his audience changed markedly. For example, both Sweeney and Rowe argue that after 1605 Jonson suppresses his combative- ness and becomes more conciliatory. But their studies focus on how the audience is manifested in the playscript rather than the prefatory matter, and they do not consider in detail how Jonson portrays his audience in the 1616 folio or in plays published after Bartholomew Fair. 18. The extraliterary texts omitted in the folio are: the “anonymous” blurbs in Every Man Out of His Humor; “To the Readers” and marginal glosses to Sejanus; and the epistles “To the Reader” to Catiline and The Alchemist. Jonson also modified the original “To the Reader” to Poetaster to introduce the “apologeticall Dialogue” included in the folio. 19. David Riggs, Ben Jonson: A Life (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989) 222, 224. 20. On the innovativeness of the folio’s dedications, see W. H. Herendeen, “A New Way to Pay Old Debts: Pretexts to the 1616 Folio,” in Ben Jonson’s 1616 Folio, ed. Jennifer Brady and W. H. Herendeen (Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press, 1991) 40. Martin Butler argues convincingly that overemphasis on the folio’s innovations has obscured the text’s “micropolitics of interest and obligation, competition and local advantage with which, for all its provocative modernity, the volume continues to be engaged,” “Jonson’s Folio and the Politics of Patronage,” Criticism 35 (1993): 379. 21. See, for example, Riggs 220–39 and Dutton, Ben Jonson 61–9. 22. See William P. Williams, “Chetwin, Crooke, and the Jonson Folios,” Studies in Bibliography 30 (1977): 75–95. 23. On the unusual typographic features of the “Argument” to the quarto edition of Sejanus, see John Jowett, “Jonson’s Authorization of Type in Sejanus and Other Early Quartos,” Studies in Bibliography 44 (1991): 259–60. 24. Jonas A. Barish, “Jonson and the Loathèd Stage,” in A Celebration of Ben Jonson, ed. William Blissett, Julian Patrick, and R. W. Van Fossen (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973) 27–53, rpt. in The Antitheatrical Prejudice (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1981) 132–54. 25. Louis B. Wright, “The Reading of Plays during the Puritan Revolution,” Huntington Library Bulletin 6 (1934): 73–108; Alfred Harbage, Cavalier Drama (New York: MLA, 1936); Dale B. J. Randall, Winter Fruit: English Drama 1642–1660 (Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press, 1995); Susan Wiseman, Drama and Politics in the English Civil War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998). 188 NOTES

26. See Hume, “Securing a Repertory: Plays on the London Stage 1660–5,” in Poetry and Drama 1570–1700: Essays in Honour of Harold F. Brooks, ed. Antony Coleman and Antony Hammond (London: Methuen, 1981) 156–72. 27. Judith Milhous and Hume, “Dating Play Premières from Publication Data, 1660–1700,” Harvard Library Bulletin 22 (1974): 374–405. On the connec- tions between early and late seventeenth-century play publication practices, see Kewes, Authorship and Appropriation 20–7. 28. In a letter of March 4, 1699, Dryden (no doubt enviously) noted “This Day was playd a reviv’d Comedy of Mr Congreve’s calld the Double Dealer, which was never very takeing; in the play bill was printed,— Written by Mr Congreve. . .the printing an Authours name, in a Play bill, is a new manner of proceeding, at least in England,” Letters of John Dryden 112–13. 29. For example, in an effort to privilege Dryden’s indebtedness to Pierre Corneille, David Bruce Kramer flatly denies that any of kind of English prefatory model existed before him: “Ben Jonson wrote short prefaces to some of his plays, but they show little formal or tonal similarities to Dryden’s (see prefaces to Sejanus and Catiline),” The Imperial Dryden: The Poetics of Appropriation in Seventeenth-Century England (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1994) 157 n.5. According to Watson, Dryden “had practically no English precedents—only Ben Jonson, among the older dramatists, had made a practice of justifying himself in prefaces to his own plays,” The Literary Critics 53. 30. The connections between the established institution of criticism in France and the emerging institution of criticism in England has been surprisingly neglected. Kramer’s study provides some excellent insights, but it is also limited by its focus on Dryden’s appropriation of Corneille’s prefatory rhetorical strategies. 31. James M. Osborn reproduces what he considers to be the most likely prefaces written by Dryden in John Dryden: Some Biographical Facts and Problems, rev. ed. (Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Press, 1965) 193–9. On the question of Dryden’s business relationship with Herringman, see Osborn 184–93 and James Anderson Winn, John Dryden and His World (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1987) 95–6. 32. See Kewes, “ ‘Give me the sociable Pocket-books. . .’: Humphrey Moseley’s Serial Publication of Octavo Play Collections,” Publishing History 38 (1995): 5–21. 33. Dutton, Ben Jonson 23. 34. Given Rochester’s reputation, modern scholars have frequently discussed the likelihood of irony in Dryden’s praise. See, for example, Winn 245–7. 35. On the similarities between Flecknoe’s and Dryden’s critical writing (in particular, their understanding of literary history), see Hume, Dryden’s Criticism 83–4. 36. The tone of this preface bothered Samuel Pepys, who felt that Dryden was bragging about the success of the play, The Diary of Samuel Pepys, NOTES 189

ed. Robert Latham and William Matthews, 11 vols. (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1970–83) 9:29. Pepys’s reaction perhaps helps to explain the continuing presence of the modesty topos. 37. Jonathan Swift, A Tale of a Tub, ed. A. C. Guthkelch and D. Nichol Smith (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1958) 131. 38. The Works of John Dryden, ed. Sir Walter Scott, 18 vols. (Edinburgh: William Miller, 1808) 1:531. 39. Literary Criticism of John Dryden, ed. Arthur C. Kirsch (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1966) xii–xiii. 40. Dunn uses the preface to Fables Ancient and Modern (1700) as a representa- tive example of Dryden’s prefatory rhetoric, but this preface is notably uncharacteristic in its purpose, content, and tone. See Pretexts of Authority 138–45. Gelber defends Dryden by focusing on his artistic and critical achievements rather than investigating why he adopted such a self-centered authorial voice, which he regards as characteristic of the period: “Self- justification alone does not make Dryden’s criticism either defiant or novel. What is novel, and perhaps defiant, is the disarming interplay of learned argument and autobiographical aside” (21). 41. All references to this play are from George Villiers, second Duke of Buckingham, The Rehearsal, ed. D. E. L. Crane (Durham, NC: University of Durham Publications, 1976). 42. Swift, A Tale of a Tub, ed. Guthkelch and Smith 131. See, for example, the preface to Oedipus (1679), where Dryden admits, “we have given you more already than was necessary for a Preface, and for ought we know, may gain no more by our instructions, than that Politick Nation is like to do, who have taught their Enemies to fight so long, that at last they are in a condi- tion to invade them” (13:117 italics reversed). 43. For a brief discussion of the conventions of this genre from 1660 to 1700, see Stanley L. Archer, “The Epistle Dedicatory in Restoration Drama,” RECTR 10 (1971): 8–13. 44. Robert Markley, Two-Edg’d Weapons: Style and Ideology in the Comedies of Etherege, Wycherley and Congreve (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988) 181. 45. The Plain-Dealer, in The Plays of William Wycherley, ed. Arthur Friedman (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979) 365 (italics reversed). 46. See, for example, Deborah C. Payne, “ ‘And Poets Shall by Patron-Princes Live’: Aphra Behn and Patronage,” in Curtain Calls: British and American Women and the Theater, 1660–1820, ed. Mary Anne Schofield and Cecilia Macheski (Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 1991) 105–19; Laurie Finke, “Aphra Behn and the Ideological Construction of Restoration Literary Theory,” in Rereading Aphra Behn: History, Theory, and Criticism, ed. Heidi Hunter (Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia, 1993) 17–43; Jessica Munns, “ ‘Good, Sweet, Honey, Sugar-Candied Reader’: Aphra Behn’s Foreplay in Forewards,” in Rereading Aphra Behn 44–62; Laura L. Runge, Gender and Language in British Literary Criticism, 1660–1790 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997) 128–37; Marcie Frank, Gender, Theatre, and the Origins of Criticism 96–100. 190 NOTES

47. Women Critics 1660–1820: An Anthology, ed. Folger Collective on Early Women Critics (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1995) 17–28; Literary Criticism and Theory: The Greeks to the Present, ed. Robert Con Davis and Laurie Finke (New York: Longman, 1989) 290–7. The historical context and critical analysis in Norma Clarke’s The Rise and Fall of the Woman of Letters (London: Pimlico, 2004) provides a useful complement to these anthologies. 48. Given its importance as a defense against charges of plagiarism and its resemblance to some of Jonson’s extraliterary matter, I am counting the “Post-Script” to The Rover (1677) as prefatory matter. 49. Payne, “Aphra Behn and Patronage” 106–10. 50. Finke begins her analysis by stating, “This essay asks what difference it makes to the history of literary criticism if we read the epistles, dedications, and prefaces to Behn’s plays, poems, and novels next to, against, and in conjunc- tion with canonical works from the same period, like, say, Dryden’s ‘Essay of Dramatic Poesy’ ” (18–19). Frank points out that recent scholarship has exaggerated the differences between Behn and Dryden; but in her brief account of Behn’s criticism, Frank understates the ways in which the two writers are dissimilar, Gender, Theatre, and the Origins of Criticism 96–100. 51. See, for example, John Day’s dedication “To Signior No-body” prefaced to Humour out of Breath (1608). 52. The dedication to The Dutch Lover,inThe Works of Aphra Behn, ed. Janet Todd, 7 vols. (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1992–96) 5:160. All references to Behn’s plays are from this edition, and will hereafter be cited parenthetically in the text by volume and page number.

Chapter 2 The “laughing Critick”: Thomas Rymer and Burlesque Criticism 1. Rymer did, of course, publish his unperformed play Edgar in 1678, which did more harm to his reputation as a critic than establish his reputation as a dramatist. Dryden anticipated this reaction in his letter to Dorset mention- ing Tragedies of the Last Age: “he is the only man I know capable of finding out a poets blind sides: and if he can hold heere without exposeing his Edgar to be censurd by his Enemyes; I thinke there is no man will dare to answer him, or can,” Letters of John Dryden 14. Evidently, Rymer’s publisher did not foresee such a conflict of interest, for he included, at the end of the table of contents for Tragedies of the Last Age, an advertisement announcing the publication of Edgar. 2. Saintsbury, A History of Criticism and Literary Taste in Europe 2:397. 3. The Whole Critical Works of Monsieur Rapin, 2 vols. (London, 1706) A2v. 4. Atkins, English Literary Criticism 71–2. 5. Watson, The Literary Critics 46, 50. 6. On Rymer’s use of history, particularly in relationship to Dryden, see Earl Miner, “Mr. Dryden and Mr. Rymer,” Philological Quarterly 54 (1975): 137–51, NOTES 191

esp. 143–50 and Gerard Reedy, “Rymer and History,” CLIO 7 (1978): 409–22. 7. Dryden admitted to Dennis in a letter ca. March 1694, “I reverence Mr. Rym—s Learning, but I detest his Ill Nature and his Arrogance. I indeed, and such as I, have reason to be afraid of him, but Shakespear has not,” Letters of John Dryden 72. 8. Worth noting is that Dryden identified Rymer’s varied approach as a major failing in Tragedies of the Last Age. As he commented in the “Heads,” “Want of Method, in this Excellent Treatise, makes the Thoughts of the Author sometimes obscure” (17:192). 9. Edmund Waller, Poems, &c. Written upon several Occasions, and to Several Persons, 8th ed. (London, 1711) xlvii. 10. Anthony Ashley Cooper, third Earl of Shaftesbury, Characteristicks of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times, ed. Philip Ayres, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999) 1:136–7. 11. The Critical Works of John Dennis 1:16. Unless otherwise indicated, all refer- ences to Dennis’s works are from this edition, and will hereafter be cited parenthetically in the text by volume and page number. 12. Jean I. Marsden, The Re-Imagined Text: Shakespeare, Adaptation, & Eighteenth-Century Literary Theory (Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 1995) 56. 13. To promote the improvement of English drama, Gerard Langbaine suggests that the “Nobility and Gentry” “read over what is extant on this Subject in English, as, Ben. Johnson’s Discoveries; Roscommon’s Translation of Horace’s Art of Poetry; Rapin’s Reflections on Aristotle’s Treatise of Poetry; Longinus of the loftineß of Speech; Boyleau’s Art of Poetry; Hedelin’s Art of the Stage; Euremont’s Essays; Rimer’s Tragedies of the last Age considered; Dryden’s Drammatick Essay; and several others,” Momus Triumphans: or, The Plagiaries of the English Stage (London, 1688) a3v–a4r. 14. In the dedication “To Lord Radcliffe” prefixed to Examen poeticum (1693), Dryden briefly responds to what he perceived as a personal attack in A Short View of Tragedy (Of Dramatic Poesy 2:159–60). John Dennis, The Impartial Critick: or, Some Observations upon a Late Book, Entituled, A Short View of Tragedy, Written by Mr. Rymer (1693). Charles Gildon, “Some Reflections on Mr. Rymer’s Short View of Tragedy, and an Attempt at a Vindication of Shakepear, in an Essay directed to John Dryden Esq” and “An Essay at a Vindication of Love in Tragedies, against Rapin and Mr. Rymer. Directed to Mr. Dennis,” in Miscellaneous Letters and Essays (London, 1694) 64–118, 145–71. 15. Facsimiles of A Short View of Tragedy have been published by Augustus M. Kelley (1970), Garland (1974), and Routledge/Thoemmes Press (1994). J. E. Spingarn offers excerpts of A Short View of Tragedy (chapters I, on the chorus, and VII, on Othello) in Critical Essays of the Seventeenth Century, ed. J. E. Spingarn, 3 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1908) 2:208–55. 16. Miner, “Mr. Dryden and Mr. Rymer” 140. 17. Zimansky 250–1. 192 NOTES

18. Wellek, The Rise of English Literary History (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1941) 44. 19. Reedy is virtually alone in identifying Rymer’s interest in Aristophanes in A Short View of Tragedy and pointing out that Rymer adopts the playwright as a “double, into whom in certain moments of writing he could escape” (412). But he does not elaborate on the significance of this “double” or question why Rymer would assume this role. 20. Rymer’s ostensible lack of faith in the English theater’s regulatory practices was evidently justified. Charles Killigrew, Master of the Revels from 1677 to 1725, was an incompetent and ineffectual censor. See Kinservik, “Theatrical Regulation.” 21. In the preface to Momus Triumphans, Langbaine anticipates Rymer’s praise for the contribution of Cardinal Richelieu and the Académie to the flourishing of the theater in modern France: “. . .would some great Man appear here in the defence of Poetry, and for the support of good Poets, as the great Cardinal Richlieu, that Noble Patron of Arts and Sciences, did in France” (a3v). For a discussion of Langbaine’s importance as a literary critic, see chapter 3, “Plagiarism and Property,” of Kewes, Authorship and Appropriation. 22. In the dedication to Examen poeticum, Dryden states, “Neither can we accept of those Lay-Bishops, as some call them, who, under pretence of reforming the stage, would intrude themselves upon us as our superiors; being indeed incompetent judges of what is manners, what religion and, least of all, what is poetry and good sense,” Of Dramatic Poesy 2:161. Tate, who was Poet Laureate during Rymer’s tenure as Historiographer Royal, proposes that “supervisors of Plays be appointed by the Government”; “that all Plays (capa- ble of being reform’d) be rectify’d by their Authors if Living”; that other writ- ers be appointed “to Alter and reform Those of Deceased Authors”; and that “the Theatres & Actors to be Under Strict Discipline & Orders.” Tate’s pro- posal is reported and quoted in Joseph Wood Krutch, Comedy and Conscience after the Restoration (1924; 2nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press, 1949) 177–8. Gildon offers his support for Rymer’s proposal in the seventh volume to Rowe’s Shakespear: “the only Way to make the Stage flourish is to put it into the Hands of the Magistrate, and the Management of Men of Learning and Genius; which wou’d once again bring this admirable Art to its Old Perfection” (lxvii). See also The Post-Man Robb’d of his Mail (London, 1719) (particularly “Charles Dickson” ’ s proposals for establishing a Royal Academy of Arts and Science, Book V, Letters VI–XI, 300–39), and The Complete Art of Poetry, 2 vols. (London, 1718) 1:38. 23. Rymer’s patriotic motivations might also explain why he chose Waller’s poem “To the King,” hardly, as Dennis points out in The Impartial Critick, the poet’s finest work (1:28). 24. Letters of John Dryden 58–9. 25. Shakespeare was, of course, subject to the scrutiny of the Master of the Revels. Given the lack of power exercised by this office in the late seventeenth century, Rymer perhaps assumed the official court censor had always been ineffectual. NOTES 193

Indeed, modern scholars still question the function, power, and import of the Master of the Revels and dramatic censorship in Shakespeare’s day. See the Introduction to Dutton, Mastering the Revels: The Regulation and Censorship of English Renaissance Drama (Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press, 1991). 26. For a detailed account of the experimentation during this important period in the history of English tragedy, see my “New Directions in Serious Drama on the London Stage, 1675–1678,” Philological Quarterly 73 (1994): 219–42. 27. In “Some Reflections,” Gildon actually agrees with Rymer here, but he argues that Shakespeare should not be criticized for providing his audience with the “Extravagances” they so clearly desired (88–9). 28. For a discussion of Shakespeare’s literary reputation during this time, see Hume, “Before the Bard: ‘Shakespeare’ in Early Eighteenth-Century London,” ELH 64 (1997): 41–75. 29. Marsden, Re-Imagined Text 58. 30. See especially Dennis’s letter to the Spectator, printed in An Essay on the Genius and Writings of Shakespear (1712), where he asserts that Rymer, “notwithstanding the Rage of all the Poetasters of the Times, whom he has exasperated by opening the Eyes of the Blind that they may see their Errors, will always pass with impartial Posterity for a most learned, a most judicious, and a most useful Critick” (2:19). 31. Dryden admitted to Tonson, “[Rymer] has spoken slightly of me in his last Critique: & that gave me occasion to snarl againe,” Letters of John Dryden 59. Dryden is also perhaps responding to Rymer’s satire, An epistle to Mr Dryden (“Dryden, thy Wit has catterwauld too long” (1688)). 32. Letters of John Dryden 71–2. 33. Earlier, in the dedication to Examen poeticum, Dryden dismissed the chorus as “an unprofitable encumbrance,” suggesting that it would not be established “unless it were supported by a public charge” (Of Dramatic Poesy 2:161). 34. Hooker conveniently summarizes the controversy over the chorus in the sev- enteenth and eighteenth centuries in his notes to The Impartial Critick 1:437. 35. See Jonson’s epistle “To the Readers” prefixed to Sejanus (¶2r). Toward the end of A Short View of Tragedy, Rymer criticizes Jonson’s handling of the chorus in Catiline (171–2). 36. Interestingly, Rymer, who at the end of Tragedies of the Last Age promised a critique of Paradise Lost (76), makes no mention of Milton’s closet drama or his advocacy of the chorus. 37. The preface to Aristotle’s Art of Poetry, trans. Anonymous (London, 1705) b1v (italics reversed). 38. Jeremy Collier, A Short View of the Immorality and Profaneness of the English Stage (London, 1698) 149–51. 39. See the Introduction to Augustan Critical Writing, ed. and intro. David Womersley (London: Penguin, 1997) xi–xliv. 40. Gary Taylor, Reinventing Shakespeare: A Cultural History from the Restoration to the Present (London: Hogarth Press, 1990) 135. 41. John Oldmixon, An Essay on Criticism (London, 1728) 8. 194 NOTES

Chapter 3 The Parson turn’d Critick: Jeremy Collier and his Antagonists 1. See Krutch, Comedy and Conscience 108–9. 2. According to Barish, “Frequently, and rather disarmingly, [Collier] seems to forget his role as anti-theatrical polemicist in order to take up the more interesting one as dramatic critic, sometimes straying far from the point in order to do so,” The Antitheatrical Prejudice 224–5; Williams, “No Cloistered Virtue: Or, Playwright versus Priest in 1698,” PMLA 90 (1975): 235. 3. Burt, Licensed by Authority chapter 1; see also Kinservik, “Censorship and Generic Change.” 4. Hume, “Jeremy Collier and the Future of the London Theater in 1698.” 5. I will limit my discussion of Collier’s use of dramatic prefatory criticism to plays he cites in A Short View. 6. “Now whether or no Plays (Comedies I mean) have any business at all, or whether their chief and prime business is not to dievert the Audience, and relieve the Mind fatiegu’d with the business of the foregoing part of the day, is yet a disputable point,” A Vindication of the Stage (London, 1698) 4. 7. Spingarn, ed., Critical Essays of the Seventeenth Century 1:lxxxv–lxxxvii. 8. Oldmixon, Reflections on the Stage, and Mr Collyer’s Defence of the Short View (London, 1699) 102–3. The text is presented as a series of four dialogues between Savage and Bevill. Oldmixon deliberately avoids giving a “Character of the Persons introduc’d,” but, because the purpose of the nar- rative is to demonstrate to Bevill his error in admiring Collier’s writing, Savage probably represents the author’s positions. 9. The Impartial Critick 1:16; John Vanbrugh, A Short Vindication of The Relapse and The Provok’d Wife, from Immorality and Profaneness (London, 1698) 58. 10. For a discussion of the influence of Seneca on late seventeenth- and early eighteenth-century prose, see George Williamson, The Senecan Amble: A Study in Prose Form from Bacon to Collier (London: Faber and Faber, 1951) chapter 11. 11. William Congreve, Amendments of Mr. Collier’s False and Imperfect Citations, &c. (London, 1698) 9–10. This is one of the four “postulata” that form the basis of Congreve’s refutation of Collier. 12. See Benjamin Hellinger, “Jeremy Collier’s ‘False and Imperfect Citations’,” RECTR 14 (1975): 34–47. 13. See in particular pp. 23–4. Collier suggests that Terence’s “Modesty” may have contributed to his “Caution and Sobriety of Language,” adding, “But however his Fancy stood, he was sensible the Coarse way would not do. The Stage was then under Discipline, the publick Censors formidable, and the Office of the Choragus was originally to prevent the Excesses of Liberty” (23). 14. Collier, A Short View 279. Compare this passage to Rymer’s warning regard- ing the theater in A Short View of Tragedy: “This is, indeed, of all diversions the most bewitching; and the Theatre is a Magazine, not to be trusted, but under the special eye and direction of a Virtuous Government” (111). NOTES 195

15. According to Krutch, “In choosing his method Collier was extremely skillful, but in choosing plays for elaborate analysis and condemnation he showed a certain lack of discretion which is notable throughout his work” (111). 16. Congreve, Amendments 18, 97–8; James Drake, The Antient and Modern Stages Survey’d (London, 1699) 184–6. 17. Thomas Durfey, Preface to The Campaigners (London, 1698) 6. 18. The objectionable passage reads: “’Tis true; This is the Woman, that tempted me. But this is the Serpent, that tempted the Woman; And if my Prayers might be heard, her Punishment for so doing, shou’d be like the Serpent’s of Old” (p. 77). Collier omits the “obscene” concluding line, “She should lie upon her Face, all the days of her Life.” 19. Elkanah Settle, A Farther Defence of Dramatick Poetry (London, 1698) 49. 20. Vanbrugh, A Short Vindication 78–9. 21. Marsden, “Female Spectatorship, Jeremy Collier and the Anti-Theatrical Debate,” ELH 65 (1998): 877–98. 22. Vanbrugh, A Short Vindication 45–6. 23. According to Oldmixon in The History of England, During the Reigns of King William and Queen Mary, Queen Anne, King George I (London, 1735), “the religious part of the Town cry’d it up, and some of the wealthy ones rewarded him, particularly a Presbyterian, Sir Owen Buckingham, an Alderman of London, and Member of Parliament for Reading, sent him 20 Guineas” (192). 24. See Hume, “Jeremy Collier” and Kinservik, “Censorship and Generic Change.” 25. Preface to The Twin-Rivals in The Works of George Farquhar, ed. Shirley Strum Kenny, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988) 1:499. 26. Eric Rothstein, George Farquhar, TEAS 58 (New York: Twayne, 1967) 57–62. 27. For a good account of the connections between Collier and Steele, see John Loftis, Steele at Drury Lane (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1952) 13–25. 28. Richard Steele, Mr. Steele’s Apology for Himself and his Writings (London, 1714) 48. 29. Spectator No. 65, The Spectator, ed. Donald F. Bond, 5 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965) 1:280. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to the Spectator are from this edition, and will hereafter be cited parenthetically in the text by volume and page number.

Chapter 4 “Criticks by Profession”: John Dennis and Charles Gildon 1. Spectator No. 21, 1:88. 2. This anecdote is reported in Joseph Spence’s Observations, Anecdotes, and Characters of Books and Men, ed. James M. Osborn, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966) 1:274–75. 3. “Mr. Dryden to Mr. Dennis” in Dennis, Letters Upon Several Occasions (London, 1696) 53–8. This letter is reproduced in Letters of John Dryden 70–4. 196 NOTES

4. For a detailed discussion of Gildon’s journalistic work, see Fred Henry MacIntosh, “Charles Gildon: A Study of His Work as Professional Man of Letters, Creative Writer, and Critic,” Ph.D. diss., Duke University, 1955, chapter 1. 5. For a brief discussion of the boom in miscellanies during this time, see Hugh Macdonald, “Some Poetical Miscellanies, 1672–1716,” Essays and Studies 26 (1940): 106–12. 6. The Dunciad, ed. James Sutherland, Vol. 5 in The Twickenham Edition of the Poems of Alexander Pope, 3rd ed. (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1963) 5:53. 7. Dennis, Reflections Critical and Satyrical, Upon a Late Rhapsody, Call’d, An Essay upon Criticism (1711) 1:399. In The Complete Art of Poetry, Gildon observes that Aristotle “might have written many Odes, Elegies, or the like, yet we do not find that ever he writ a Tragedy, or Epic Poem; and yet his Criticisms are chiefly on those two Kinds of Poesy” (1:128). 8. See Gildon’s transcription of Shaftesbury’s defense of critics and criticism excerpted from Characteristicks of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times and prefaced to A New Rehearsal, or Bays the Younger (London, 1714): “ ‘Did not Mr. R— who Criticiz’d upon our English Tragedy, Write a sorry one of his own? — If he did (Gentlemen) ’twas his own fault not to know his Genius better’ ” (A5v italics reversed). In Letter IV of The Characters and Conduct of Sir John Edgar (1720), Dennis observes, “The Cry has gone round, that ’tis impossible for any one who has shewn himself a Critick by his Prose, to shew himself a good Poet by his Verse; which was occasion’d first, by the late Mr. Rymer’s pub- lishing a very dull Tragedy of Edgar, after he had publish’d a Book in Prose, in which there was a great deal of good and just Criticism” (2:209). 9. See also the dedication to Dennis, Miscellanies in Verse and Prose: “to find faults requires but common Sense; but to discern rare Beauties, requires a rare Genius” (2:379). 10. Dennis, Remarks on Prince Arthur 1:49–50; “A large Account of the Taste in Poetry” 1:289; The Decay and Defects of Dramatick Poetry 2:277. 11. Three Hours after Marriage in John Gay, Dramatic Works, ed. John Fuller, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983) 1:1.386–8. 12. Dennis, Essay on the Opera’s 1:389. 13. Gildon, “An Account of the Life of the Incomperable Mrs. Behn,” prefaced to Aphra Behn, The Younger Brother (London, 1696); The Histories and Novels Of the Late Ingenious Mrs Behn: In One Volume. . .Together with The Life and Memoirs of Mrs. Behn. Written by One of the Fair Sex (London, 1696) and the second edition (1698) issued with “considerable additions to her life”; The Life of Mr. Thomas Betterton (London, 1710); and Memoirs of the Life of William Wycherley (London, 1718). 14. The Tatler, ed. Donald F. Bond, 3 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987) 2:415. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to the Tatler are from this edition and will hereafter be cited parenthetically in the text by volume and page number. NOTES 197

15. Both letters appear in Letter XLII, Gildon, The Post-Boy Robb’d of his Mail, 2nd ed. (London, 1706) 342–7. 16. For a full discussion, particularly concerning Gildon’s efforts to demonstrate the importance of Shakespeare’s poems in understanding the totality of the Bard’s artistry and career, see my, “Early Shakespeare Criticism, Charles Gildon, and the Making of Shakespeare the Playwright-Poet,” Modern Philology 102 (2004): 35–55. 17. Modern scholars frequently claim that Volume 7 was “unauthorized,” which suggests that the text was pirated. But Volume 7 does not replicate any of the material in the Tonson–Rowe edition. Edmund Curll and Egbert Sanger simply appropriated the packaging of the Tonson–Rowe edition, a marketing strategy that was perfectly legal. See Peter Holland’s introduction to the facsimile edition of The Works of Mr. William Shakespear, 7 vols. (London: Pickering & Chatto, 1999) 1:xxiii–xxv. 18. In “Some Account of the Life, &c. of Mr. William Shakespear,” Rowe’s attitude toward the poems is, in fact, remarkably cavalier: he only mentions the exis- tence of Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece, and concludes the essay by casually pointing out, “There is a Book of Poems, publish’d in 1640, under the Name of Mr. William Shakespear [John Benson’s Poems: Written by Wil. Shake- speare. Gent.], but as I have but very lately seen it, without an Opportunity of making any Judgment upon it, I won’t pretend to determine, whether it be his or no” (xl). In an effort to explain Rowe’s attitude, modern scholars have sug- gested that Tonson did not publish the poems because he did not own the copyrights to them. But the copyrights to Shakespeare’s poems seem to have expired before 1709, resulting in two competing editions—Gildon’s Volume 7 and Bernard Lintott’s A Collection of Poems. . .By Mr. William Shakespeare (London, 1709, 1711). And, although Tonson officially integrated Gildon’s text of the poems into the third edition of Rowe’s Shakespear in 1714, they were not included in any subsequent Tonson edition. 19. See Francis Edwards Litz, “The Sources of Charles Gildon’s Complete Art of Poetry,” ELH 9 (1942): 118–35. 20. Gildon, The Post-Man Robb’d of his Mail or the Packet broke open, intro. Malcolm J. Bosse (1719; New York: Garland Press, 1972) 6. 21. A New Project is not listed in the ESTC; either no copy has survived or the pamphlet was never published. Hooker summarily rejects the attribution of A New Project to either Dennis or Gildon (2:ix), but references to A New Project in his notes suggest he believed the pamphlet actually appeared. 22. See, for example, “Charles Dickson’”s letters in Gildon, The Post-Man Robb’d, and Dennis’s dedication to Thomas Pelham-Holles, Duke of Newcastle prefaced to The Invader of His Country (1720). 23. The 1734 version of this passage reads: “Yet then did Gildon draw his venal quill; / I wish’d the man a dinner, and sate still: / Yet then did Dennis rave in furious fret; / I never answer’d, I was not in debt: / If want provok’d, or madness made them print, / I wag’d no war with Bedlam or the Mint,” Pope, An Epistle from Mr. Pope, to Dr. Arbuthnot (London, 1734) 8. 198 NOTES

24. Pope, Peri Bathous: or, Martinus Scriblerus his Treatise of the Art of Sinking in Poetry in Swift, Miscellanies in Prose and Verse, 4 vols. (London, 1727) 4:85–92 and 4:27.

Chapter 5 The Journalistic Critic from The Gentleman’s Journal to The Spectator 1. Much of the literary material in late seventeenth- and eighteenth-century newspapers and periodicals was uncovered by scholars in the 1920s and 1930s. Walter Graham’s The Beginnings of English Literary Periodicals (New York: Oxford University Press, 1926) and English Literary Periodicals (New York: Thomas Nelson, 1930), and Charles Harold Gray’s Theatrical Criticism in London to 1795 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1931) remain standard books on the subject. 2. See, for example, Lee Andrew Elioseff, The Cultural Milieu of Addison’s Literary Criticism (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1963) and William H. Youngren, “Addison and the Birth of Eighteenth-Century Aesthetics,” Modern Philology 79 (1982): 267–83. 3. See, for example, Watson, The Literary Critics 63–66; Lillian D. Bloom, “Addison’s Popular Aesthetic: The Rhetoric of the Paradise Lost Papers,” in The Author in His Work: Essays on a Problem in Criticism, ed. Louis L. Martz and Aubrey Williams (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1978) 263–81; Leopold Damrosch, Jr., “The Significance of Addison’s Criticism,” SEL 19 (1979): 421–30; Edward A. and Lillian D. Bloom, “Joseph Addison: The Artist in the Mirror,” in Educating the Audience: Addison, Steele, & Eighteenth- Century Culture (Los Angeles, CA: William Andrews Clark Memorial Library, 1984) 3–48; Michael G. Ketcham, Transparent Designs: Reading, Performance, and Form in the Spectator Papers (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1985); and Erin Mackie, Market à la Mode: Fashion, Commodity, and Gender in The Tatler and The Spectator (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997). 4. Henry Felton, A Dissertation On Reading the Classics, And Forming a Just Style (London, 1713) xiv. 5. Defoe’s claim appeared in the November 25, 1708 issue of the Review (Vol. 5, No. 104, p. 414). 6. Alexandre Beljame considers how Addison negotiated the conflicting needs of his diverse readership; but he attributes the success of the Spectator exclu- sively to Addison’s personal accomplishments and contemporary reputa- tion, which neglects the anonymity of his contributions and the efforts of his collaborators. See Men of Letters and the English Public in the Eighteenth Century 1660–1744, Dryden, Addison, Pope, ed. Bonamy Dobrée and trans. E. O. Lorimer (1881; London: Kegan Paul, 1948). 7. Sybil Rosenfeld, “The Restoration Stage in Newspapers and Journal, 1660–1700,” MLR 30 (1935): 445–59. For an extensive list of references to theatrical concerns in London newspapers and periodicals, see A Register of English Theatrical Documents, 1660–1737, ed. Milhous and Hume, 2 vols. (Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1991). NOTES 199

8. See Rosenfeld, “Dramatic Advertisements in the Burney Newspapers 1660–1700,” PMLA 51 (1936): 123–52. 9. See J. H. Wilson, “Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters,” Theatre Notebook 15 (1961): 79–84. 10. Alfred Jackson offers a brief survey of this material in, “The Stage and the Authorities, 1700–1714 (As Revealed in the Newspapers),” The Review of English Studies 14 (1938): 53–62. 11. For the text of this epilogue and relevant context, see The Prologues and Epilogues of the Eighteenth Century, ed. Pierre Danchin, 2 vols. (Nancy: Presses Universitaires de Nancy, 1990–93) vol. 1 part 1, pp. 149–58. 12. In Observator Vol. 5, No. 34 ( July 10–13, 1706), Tutchin declares, “I could wish the Nobility and Gentry. . .instead of Reading Plays, would Read that Excellent Book of Mr. Colliers. . . .” Collier’s Dissuasive is quoted at length in Observator Vol. 2, No. 90 (February 12–16, 1703/04). 13. See Observators Vol. 2, No. 77 (December 29, 1703–January 1, 1703/04) and No. 78 ( January 1–5, 1703/04). 14. Responding to Collier’s A Short View, Motteux included a translation of this letter in a preface to his own play, Beauty in Distress (London, 1698). 15. Similarly, Robert Newton Cunningham argues that the Gentleman’s Journal “helped appreciably to break down the seventeenth-century prejudice against verse as something associated with flippancy and vice,” Peter Anthony Motteux, 1663–1718: A Biographical and Critical Study (Oxford: Blackwell, 1933) 13. 16. As Dunton later admitted in The Life and Errors of John Dunton (London, 1705), once Wesley joined the original team of Dunton and Sault, “we found our selves to be Masters of the whole Design, and thereupon we neither lessen’d nor increas’d our Number” (257). On April 10, 1691, the three men drew up a contract detailing their responsibilities in producing the periodical (Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson D 72, No. 65, reproduced in Stephen Parks, John Dunton and the English Book Trade (New York: Garland, 1976) 81–2). 17. The full list of professions of the Athenian Society members is as follows: a divine, a philosopher, a physician, a poet, a mathematician, a lawyer, a civilian, “a chyrurgion,” an Italian, a Spaniard, a “French-man,” and a “Dutch-man” (13). 18. Blount reproduced in its entirety the Athenian Mercury’s response to the question, “Whether Milton and Waller were not the best English Poets? and which the better of the two?” (Vol. 5, No. 14, question 3 ( January 16, 1692)) (137–8). He also excerpted a passage responding to the question, “Whether Sappho or Mrs. Behn were the better Poetess?” (Vol. 5, No. 13, question 8 ( January 12, 1692)) (196). 19. After the March 1692 issue, Motteux consistently signed the courteous close to the Gentleman’s Journal with only two exceptions—the issues of April 1692 and June 1694. Motteux signed his full name to four installments: December 1692; July 1693; December 1693; and January–February 1694. 20. On Motteux’s struggles as editor of the Gentleman’s Journal, see Dorothy Foster, “The Earliest Precursor of Our Present-Day Monthly Miscellanies,” PMLA 32 (1917): 27–9. 200 NOTES

21. For an excellent discussion of Langbaine on authorship, see chapter 3: “Plagiarism and Property,” in Kewes, Authorship and Appropriation. 22. See, for example, Albert Furtwangler, “The Making of Mr. Spectator,” MLQ 38 (1977): 21–39. 23. Richmond P. Bond, The Tatler: The Making of a Literary Journal (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971) 182. 24. Bond, Making of a Literary Journal 6–7. 25. Dedication “To Mr. Maynwaring” prefaced to Vol. 1 of the Tatler, 1:8. 26. Because Bickerstaff and Mr. Spectator are just as important as the “actual” authors of the essays in the Tatler and Spectator, references to these periodicals will include both the names of eidola and the staff writer(s). 27. Only 18 issues of the Spectator are unsigned. On the attribution of the initials, see Bond, Spectator 1:xliv–lii. 28. Doggett’s invitation and Bickerstaff’s reply appear at the end of Tatler No. 120. Doggett’s benefit was performed on January 16, 1710. John Baskerville’s edition of The Works of the Late Right Honorable Joseph Addison, Esq., 4 vols. (Birmingham, 1761) is the first to report “A Person dressed for Isaac Bickerstaff did appear at the Play-house on this occasion” (2:246). But no evidence exists to substantiate this claim. 29. John Nichols suggests that Bickerstaff’s protégé is Leonard Welsted, and that the play alluded to here is The Dissembled Wanton (premiere December 14, 1726). See Donald F. Bond, 2:490, n.10. Loftis, perhaps more plausibly, suggests that Steele was writing an oblique puff for his own play, The Conscious Lovers, which premiered on November 7, 1722, Steele at Drury Lane 186–9. 30. The Careless Husband was performed at the Queen’s Theatre Haymarket on June 13, 1710, with Cibber as Lord Foppington and Wilks as Sir Charles Easy. 31. See, for example, William Kinsley, “Meaning and Format: Mr. Spectator and His Folio Half-Sheets,” ELH 34 (1967): 482–94; Lillian D. Bloom, “Addison’s Popular Aesthetic”; and, in particular, Ketcham, Transparent Designs. 32. Notes upon the Twelve Books of Paradise Lost. Collected from the Spectator. Written by Mr. Addison (London, 1719). The 1720 Tonson folio edition of The Poetical Works of Mr. John Milton includes, at the end of the text of Paradise Lost, “Notes Upon the Twelve Books of Paradise Lost. By Mr. Addison.”

Epilogue: Pope and the Discipline of Criticism in the Early Eighteenth Century 1. See, for example, Maynard Mack’s spirited discussion of the poem’s reputa- tion in Alexander Pope: A Life (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985) 167–84. Even the facsimile of the manuscript poem includes a section titled “Plagiarism and Wit,” Robert M. Schmitz, Pope’s Essay on Criticism 1709: A Study of the Bodleian Manuscript Text with Facsimiles, Transcripts, and Variants (St. Louis, MO: Washington University Press, 1962) 24–8. For a recent attempt to reevaluate the significance of the poem, particularly in terms of its relation to modern critical debates, see Smallwood, Reconstructing Criticism. NOTES 201

2. David B. Morris is virtually alone in considering Pope’s Essay as “a major attempt to place English literary analysis on the foundation of a coherent theory” and “to civilize an uncivil discipline,” Alexander Pope: The Genius of Sense (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984) 73. But, passing references to Dryden, Locke, and Dennis aside, Morris does not provide adequate context with which to gauge Pope’s innovations. 3. Pope, An Essay on Criticism (London, 1711) 4. Unless otherwise noted, all citations to the poem are from this edition. 4. In the second edition of An Essay on Criticism (1713), the last line was revised to read, “Cavil you may, but never Criticize” (7). 5. In the MS, Pope originally wrote “D—” but, at some point before publica- tion, crossed it out and replaced it with “Appius,” undoubtedly referring to the title character from Dennis’s failed tragedy, Appius and Virginia (premiere February 5, 1709). 6. In An Essay on the Genius and Writings of Shakespear, Dennis made this connection, suggesting that Steele had encouraged Pope to attack him in the Essay on Criticism (2:422). In his correspondence, Pope had spoken disparagingly of Dennis as early as 1707; but the Tatler perhaps set the precedent for putting such gossip in print. 7. For example, Ripley Hotch argues that the Essay “is not about criticism, but about the young poet writing the poem, his situation, and his claim to merit. For the poem is, if anything, not a disquisition on criticism, but a proof of the qualifications of the author to assume his place as head of the kingdom of wit he describes,” “Pope Surveys His Kingdom: An Essay on Criticism,” SEL 13 (1973): 474–5, rpt. in Critical Essays on Alexander Pope, ed. Wallace Jackson and R. Paul Yoder (New York: G. K. Hall, 1993) 103–4. Similarly, Ruben Quintero asserts, “An Essay on Criticism encapsulates his poetical intentions, and he wishes to prepare his most influential reader, the literary critic, for them,” Literate Culture: Pope’s Rhetorical Art (Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press, 1992) 21. 8. “It is difficult to think of Pope as a literary critic, but he must have expected to establish a reputation as one by his Essay on Criticism; Cromwell, in fact, flattered Pope that he had outdone Dennis in criticism. As the most con- spicuous critic then living in England, Dennis was the obvious rival and the obvious target” (2:xxvii). 9. “The present Age seemeth to be born for carrying Criticism to its highest Pitch and Perfection. . . . Many ingenious Hands have concurred to rescue it from Pedantry, Dullness, and Ill-Nature. It is no longer a dry, sour, ver- bal Study, but claimeth a Place among the politest Parts of Learning” (xiii–xiv italics reversed). 10. Alan Sokal, “Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity,” Social Text 46/47 (1996): 217–52. 11. For example, Wimsatt and Brooks, after listing other “more or less lame instances of the genre” from English authors, assert, “After Pope’s precocious summation had appeared in 1711 there was nothing further for Englishmen to say in this area” (236). 202 NOTES

12. See Reflections 1:414–15. Dennis finds such disrespect all the more egregious because of Pope’s indebtedness to Mulgrave and Roscommon in the Essay: But can any thing be more stupidly impudent and impertinent, than that this little Gentleman should rail thus at the Writings of People of Quality in this very Essay, the one half of which he has borrow’d from the two noble Authors, and appropriated it to himself, by the same Method by which a Jack-pudding engrosses a Sack-posset, viz. by mingling some Beastliness with it, which does not fail to render it nauseous to those who made it. (1:414) 13. “Postscript to the Reader,” appended to Æneis (1697) (Of Dramatic Poesy 2:261). Nevertheless, Dennis, who “had the good Fortune to know Mr. Walsh very well,” objected to his appearance on the grounds that “he had by no means the Qualification which this Author reckons absolutely necessary to a Critick” (1:416). 14. As the editors of the Twickenham Pope observe, “It is Dryden rather than Walsh who was Pope’s master in criticism. And more important than Pope’s use of Dryden as a source for particular critical ideas is the way in which the Essay reflects Dryden’s broad capacity for synthesis of the best that was thought and felt in his time, and his capacity to express the judgments of the head and the heart in memorable language,” Pastoral Poetry and An Essay on Criticism, ed. E. Audra and Aubrey Williams, Vol. 1 in The Twickenham Edition of the Poems of Alexander Pope (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1961) 222. 15. William Warburton suggests that, by giving his mentor such a privileged status in the poem’s history of critics, Pope was implicitly—and with the modesty required of the ideal critic—including himself: “[Walsh] being our Author’s Judge and Censor, as well as Friend, it gives him a graceful oppor- tunity to add himself to the number of the later Critics; and with a character of himself, sustained by that modesty and dignity which it is so difficult to make consistent,” The Works of Alexander Pope Esq., ed. William Warburton, 9 vols. (London, 1751) 1:208–9. More recently, Christa Knellwolf has suggested, “While An Essay on Criticism sets out as an attack on the stupidity of critics, it ends on the note of firmly instating the institution of the critic, provided that the right to criticise is reserved to a small group who have been legitimated (by Pope) to participate in the formation of the canon,” A Contradiction Still: Representations of Women in the Poetry of Alexander Pope (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1998) 102. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Animadversions on Mr. Congreve’s Late Answer to Mr. Collier. London, 1698. Archer, Stanley L. “The Epistle Dedicatory in Restoration Drama.” RECTR 10 (1971): 8–13. The Athenian Mercury. London, 1691–96. Atkins, J. W. H. English Literary Criticism: 17th and 18th Centuries. London: Methuen, 1951. Barbour, Richmond. “The Elizabethan Jonson in Print.” Criticism 34 (1992): 317–26. Barish, Jonas A. The Antitheatrical Prejudice. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1981. ———. “Jonson and the Loathèd Stage.” In A Celebration of Ben Jonson. Ed. William Blissett, Julian Patrick, and R. W. Van Fossen. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973. 27–53. Rpt. in The Antitheatrical Prejudice. 132–54. Bedford, Arthur. The Evil and Danger of Stage-Plays. Bristol, 1706. ———. A Serious Remonstrance In Behalf of the Christian Religion. London, 1719. Behn, Aphra. The Works of Aphra Behn. Ed. Janet Todd. 7 vols. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1992–96. Beljame, Alexandre. Men of Letters and the English Public in the Eighteenth Century 1660–1744, Dryden, Addison, Pope. Ed. Bonamy Dobrée and trans. E. O. Lorimer. 1881; London: Kegan Paul, 1948. Bentley, Gerald Eades. The Profession of Dramatist in Shakespeare’s Time, 1590–1642. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1971. Blayney, Peter W. M. “The Publication of Playbooks.” In A New History of Early English Drama. Ed. John D. Cox and David Scott Kastan. New York: Columbia University Press, 1997. 383–422. Bloom, Edward A. and Lillian D. Bloom. “Joseph Addison: The Artist in the Mirror.” In Educating the Audience: Addison, Steele, & Eighteenth-Century Culture. Los Angeles, CA: William Andrews Clark Memorial Library, 1984. 3–48. Bloom, Lillian D. “Addison’s Popular Aesthetic: The Rhetoric of the Paradise Lost Papers.” In The Author in His Work: Essays on a Problem in Criticism. Ed. Louis L. Martz and Aubrey Williams. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1978. 263–81. [Blount, Charles]. Mr. Dreyden Vindicated. London, 1673. Blount, Thomas Pope, Sir. De Re Poetica, or, Remarks upon Poetry. London, 1694. Bond, Richmond P. The Tatler: The Making of a Literary Journal. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971. 204 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Burt, Richard. Licensed by Authority: Ben Jonson and the Discourses of Censorship. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993. Butler, Martin. “Jonson’s Folio and the Politics of Patronage.” Criticism 35 (1993): 377–90. Cannan, Paul D. “Early Shakespeare Criticism, Charles Gildon, and the Making of Shakespeare the Playwright-Poet.” Modern Philology 102 (2004): 35–55. ———. “New Directions in Serious Drama on the London Stage, 1675–1678.” Philological Quarterly 73 (1994): 219–42. Cartwright, William. Comedies, Tragi-comedies, with Other Poems, by Mr. William Cartwright. London, 1651. The Censure of the Rota. Oxford, 1673. Clarke, Norma. The Rise and Fall of the Woman of Letters. London: Pimlico, 2004. Collier, Jeremy. A Defence of the Short View. London, 1699. ———. A Short View of the Immorality and Profaneness of the English Stage. London, 1698. Congreve, William. Amendments of Mr. Collier’s False and Imperfect Citations, &c. London, 1698. Cooper, Anthony Ashley, third Earl of Shaftesbury. Characteristicks of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times. Ed. Philip Ayres. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999. Crane, R. S. The Idea of the Humanities. 2 vols. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1967. ———. “On Writing the History of Criticism in England, 1650–1800.” University of Toronto Quarterly 22 (1953): 376–91. Cunningham, Robert Newton. Peter Anthony Motteux, 1663–1718: A Biographical and Critical Study. Oxford: Blackwell, 1933. Dacier, André. Aristotle’s Art of Poetry. London, 1705. Damrosch, Leopold, Jr. “The Significance of Addison’s Criticism.” SEL 19 (1979): 421–30. Danchin, Pierre, ed. The Prologues and Epilogues of the Eighteenth Century. 2 vols. Nancy: Presses Universitaires de Nancy, 1990–93. Davis, Robert Con and Laurie Finke, ed. Literary Criticism and Theory: The Greeks to the Present. New York: Longman, 1989. Defoe, Daniel. Defoe’s Review, Reproduced from the Original Editions. Ed. Arthur Wellesley Secord. 22 vols. Facsimile Text Society, no. 44. New York: Columbia University Press, 1938. Dennis, John. The Critical Works of John Dennis. Ed. Edward Niles Hooker. 2 vols. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press, 1939, 1943. A Description of the Academy of the Athenian Virtuosi. London, 1673. Drake, James. The Antient and Modern Stages Survey’d. London, 1699. Dryden, John. The Letters of John Dryden. Ed. Charles E. Ward. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1942. ———. Literary Criticism of John Dryden. Ed. Arthur C. Kirsch. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1966. ———. Of Dramatic Poesy and Other Critical Essays. Ed. and intro. George Watson. 2 vols. London: Dent, 1962. ———. The Works of John Dryden. Ed. Edward Niles Hooker, H. T. Swedenberg, Jr., et al. 20 vols. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1956–2002. BIBLIOGRAPHY 205

———. The Works of John Dryden. Ed. Sir Walter Scott. 18 vols. Edinburgh: William Miller, 1808. Dunn, Kevin. Pretexts of Authority: The Rhetoric of Authorship in the Renaissance Preface. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1994. Dunton, John. The Life and Errors of John Dunton. London, 1705. Durfey, Thomas. The Campaigners: or, The Pleasant Adventures at Brussels. A Comedy. With a Familiar Preface upon A Late Reformer of the Stage. London, 1698. Dutton, Richard. Ben Jonson: Authority: Criticism. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1996. ———. “The Birth of the Author.” In Texts and Cultural Change in Early Modern England. Ed. Cedric C. Brown and Arthur F. Marotti. London: Macmillan, 1997. 153–78. ———. Mastering the Revels: The Regulation and Censorship of English Renaissance Drama. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press, 1991. Eagleton, Terry. The Function of Criticism: From The Spectator to Post-Structuralism. London: Verso, 1984. Elioseff, Lee Andrew. The Cultural Milieu of Addison’s Literary Criticism. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1963. Engell, James. Forming the Critical Mind: Dryden to Coleridge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989. Farquhar, George. The Works of George Farquhar. Ed. Shirley Strum Kenny. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988. Felton, Henry. A Dissertation On Reading the Classics, And Forming a Just Style. London, 1713. Finke, Laurie. “Aphra Behn and the Ideological Construction of Restoration Literary Theory.” In Rereading Aphra Behn. Ed. Heidi Hunter. 17–43. Flecknoe, Richard. Love’s Dominion. London, 1654. Fletcher, John. The Faithfull Shepheardesse. London, n.d. [ca.1609]. Fœdera, conventiones, literæ, et cujuscunque generis acta publica, inter reges Angliæ, et alios quosvis imperatores, reges, pontifices, principes, vel communitates, ab ineunte sæculo duodecimo, viz. ab anno 1101, ad nostra usque tempora, habita aut tractata; ex auto- graphis, infra secretiores archivorum regiorum thesaurarias, per multa sæcula reconditis, fideliter exscripta. In lucem missa de mandato reginæ. Accurante Thoma Rymer, ejusdem serenissimæ reginæ historiographo. London, 1704–35. Folger Collective on Early Women Critics. Women Critics 1660–1820: An Anthology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1995. Foster, Dorothy. “The Earliest Precursor of Our Present-Day Monthly Miscellanies.” PMLA 32 (1917): 22–58. Frank, Marcie. Gender, Theatre, and the Origins of Criticism: From Dryden to Manley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. The Friendly Vindication of Mr. Dryden. Cambridge, 1673. Furtwangler, Albert. “The Making of Mr. Spectator.” MLQ 38 (1977): 21–39. Gay, John. Dramatic Works. Ed. John Fuller. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983. ———. The Present State of Wit. London, 1711. Gelber, Michael Werth. The Just and the Lively: The Literary Criticism of John Dryden. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999. The Gentleman’s Journal. London, 1692–94. 206 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Gildon, Charles. The Complete Art of Poetry. 2 vols. London, 1718. ———. The History of the Athenian Society. London, 1692. ———. The Laws of Poetry. London, 1721. ———. The Life of Mr. Thomas Betterton. London, 1710. ———. The Lives and Characters of the English Dramatick Poets. London, 1699. ———. Love’s Victim. London, 1701. ———. Miscellaneous Letters and Essays, On several Subjects. Philosophical, Moral, Historical, Critical, Amorous, &c. London, 1694. ———. Miscellany Poems upon Several Occasions. London, 1692. ———. A New Rehearsal, or Bays the Younger. London, 1714. ———. Phaeton: or, The Fatal Divorce. London, 1698. ———. The Post-Boy Robb’d of his Mail. 2nd ed. London, 1706. ———. The Post-Man Robb’d of his Mail or the Packet broke open. Intro. Malcolm J. Bosse. 1719; New York: Garland Press, 1972. Graham, Walter. The Beginnings of English Literary Periodicals. New York: Oxford University Press, 1926. ———. English Literary Periodicals. New York: Thomas Nelson, 1930. Gray, Charles Harold. Theatrical Criticism in London to 1795. New York: Columbia University Press, 1931. Hammond, Brean S. Professional Imaginative Writing in England, 1670–1740: “Hackney for Bread.” Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. Harbage, Alfred. Cavalier Drama. New York: MLA, 1936. Hellinger, Benjamin. “Jeremy Collier’s ‘False and Imperfect Citations’.” RECTR 14 (1975): 34–47. Herendeen, W. H. “A New Way to Pay Old Debts: Pretexts to the 1616 Folio.” In Ben Jonson’s 1616 Folio. Ed. Jennifer Brady and W. H. Herendeen. Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press, 1991. 38–63. Heywood, Thomas. The Golden Age. London, 1611. Hohendahl, Peter Uwe. The Institution of Criticism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1982. Holland, Peter. The Ornament of Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Hotch, Ripley. “Pope Surveys His Kingdom: An Essay on Criticism.” SEL 13 (1973): 474–87. Rpt. in Critical Essays on Alexander Pope. Ed. Wallace Jackson and R. Paul Yoder. New York: G. K. Hall, 1993. 103–14. Howard, Robert, Sir. Four New Plays. London, 1665. ———. The Great Favourite, Or, the Duke of Lerma. London, 1668. Hume, Robert D. “Before the Bard: ‘Shakespeare’ in Early Eighteenth-Century London.” ELH 64 (1997): 41–75. ———. Dryden’s Criticism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1970. ———. “Jeremy Collier and the Future of the London Theater in 1698.” Studies in Philology 96 (1999): 480–511. ———. “Securing a Repertory: Plays on the London Stage 1660–5.” In Poetry and Drama 1570–1700: Essays in Honour of Harold F. Brooks. Ed. Antony Coleman and Antony Hammond. London: Methuen, 1981. 156–72. BIBLIOGRAPHY 207

The Humours, and Conversations of the Town. London, 1693. Hunter, Heidi, ed. Rereading Aphra Behn: History, Theory, and Criticism. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia, 1993. Jackson, Alfred. “The Stage and the Authorities, 1700–1714 (As Revealed in the Newspapers).” The Review of English Studies 14 (1938): 53–62. Johnson, Samuel. Lives of the English Poets. Ed. George Birkbeck Hill. 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1905. Jonson, Ben. The Alchemist. London, 1612. ———. Ben Jonson. Ed. C. H. Herford, Percy Simpson, and Evelyn Simpson. 11 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925–52. ———. Ben Jonson’s Literary Criticism. Ed. James D. Redwine, Jr. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1970. ———. Catiline. London, 1611. ———. Every Man Out of His Humor. London, 1600. ———. The New Inne. London, 1631. ———. Sejanus. London, 1605. ———. The Staple of Newes. London, 1631. ———. Volpone. London, 1607. ———. The Workes of Benjamin Jonson. London, 1616. Jowett, John. “Jonson’s Authorization of Type in Sejanus and Other Early Quartos.” Studies in Bibliography 44 (1991): 254–65. Kay, W. David. “The Shaping of Ben Jonson’s Career: A Reexamination of Facts and Problems.” Modern Philology 67 (1970): 224–37. Ketcham, Michael G. Transparent Designs: Reading, Performance, and Form in the Spectator Papers. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1985. Kewes, Paulina. Authorship and Appropriation: Writing for the Stage in England, 1660–1710. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998. ———. “ ‘Give me the sociable Pocket-books. . .’: Humphrey Moseley’s Serial Publication of Octavo Play Collections.” Publishing History 38 (1995): 5–21. Kinservik, Matthew J. “Censorship and Generic Change: The Case of Satire on the Early Eighteenth-Century London Stage.” Philological Quarterly 78 (1999): 259–82. ———. “Theatrical Regulation during the Restoration Period.” In A Companion to Restoration Drama. Ed. Susan J. Owen. Oxford: Blackwell, 2001. 36–52. Kinsley, William. “Meaning and Format: Mr. Spectator and His Folio Half- Sheets.” ELH 34 (1967): 482–94. Klein, David. The Elizabethan Dramatists as Critics. New York: Philosophical Library, 1963. Knellwolf, Christa. A Contradiction Still: Representations of Women in the Poetry of Alexander Pope. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1998. Kramer, David Bruce. The Imperial Dryden: The Poetics of Appropriation in Seventeenth-Century England. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1994. Krutch, Joseph Wood. Comedy and Conscience after the Restoration. 2nd ed. 1924; New York: Columbia University Press, 1949. Langbaine, Gerard. An Account of the English Dramatick Poets. Oxford, 1691. ———. Momus Triumphans: or, The Plagiaries of the English Stage. London, 1688. 208 BIBLIOGRAPHY

A Letter to Mr. Congreve on his Pretended Amendments, &c. London, 1698. Litz, Francis Edwards. “The Sources of Charles Gildon’s Complete Art of Poetry.” ELH 9 (1942): 118–35. Loftis, John. Steele at Drury Lane. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1952. Macdonald, Hugh. “Some Poetical Miscellanies, 1672–1716.” Essays and Studies 26 (1940): 106–12. MacIntosh, Fred Henry. “Charles Gildon: A Study of His Work as Professional Man of Letters, Creative Writer, and Critic.” Ph.D. diss. Duke University, 1955. Mack, Maynard. Alexander Pope: A Life. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985. Mackie, Erin. Market à la Mode: Fashion, Commodity, and Gender in The Tatler and The Spectator. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997. Markley, Robert. Two-Edg’d Weapons: Style and Ideology in the Comedies of Etherege, Wycherley and Congreve. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988. Marsden, Jean I. “Female Spectatorship, Jeremy Collier and the Anti-Theatrical Debate.” ELH 65 (1998): 877–98. ———. The Re-Imagined Text: Shakespeare, Adaptation, & Eighteenth-Century Literary Theory. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 1995. Milhous, Judith and Robert D. Hume, ed. A Register of English Theatrical Documents, 1660–1737. 2 vols. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1991. Milhous, Judith and Robert D. Hume. “Dating Play Premières from Publication Data, 1660–1700.” Harvard Library Bulletin 22 (1974): 374–405. Miner, Earl. “Mr. Dryden and Mr. Rymer.” Philological Quarterly 54 (1975): 137–51. Morris, David B. Alexander Pope: The Genius of Sense. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984. Munns, Jessica. “ ‘Good, Sweet, Honey, Sugar-Candied Reader’: Aphra Behn’s Foreplay in Forewards.” In Rereading Aphra Behn. Ed. Heidi Hunter. 44–62. Murphy, Avon Jack. John Dennis. TEAS 382. Boston, MA: Twayne, 1984. The Muses Mercury. London, 1707–08. Newton, Richard C. “Jonson and the (Re-)Invention of the Book.” In Classic and Cavalier: Essays on Jonson and the Sons of Ben. Ed. Claude J. Summers and Ted- Larry Pebworth. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1982. 31–55. Nisbet, H. B. and Claude Rawson, ed. The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism: The Eighteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. The Observator. London, 1702–12. Oldmixon, John. An Essay on Criticism. London, 1728. ———. The History of England, During the Reigns of King William and Queen Mary, Queen Anne, King George I. London, 1735. ———. Reflections on the Stage, and Mr Collyer’s Defence of the Short View. London, 1699. Osborn, James M. John Dryden: Some Biographical Facts and Problems. Rev. ed. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Press, 1965. BIBLIOGRAPHY 209

Parks, Stephen. John Dunton and the English Book Trade. New York: Garland, 1976. Payne, Deborah C. “ ‘And Poets Shall by Patron-Princes Live’: Aphra Behn and Patronage.” In Curtain Calls: British and American Women and the Theater, 1660–1820. Ed. Mary Anne Schofield and Cecilia Macheski. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 1991. 105–19. Pechter, Edward. Dryden’s Classical Theory of Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Pepys, Samuel. The Diary of Samuel Pepys. Ed. Robert Latham and William Matthews. 11 vols. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1970–83. Pope, Alexander. The Dunciad. Ed. James Sutherland. Vol. 5 in The Twickenham Edition of the Poems of Alexander Pope. 3rd ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1963. ———. An Essay on Criticism. London, 1711. ———. Pastoral Poetry and An Essay on Criticism. Ed. E. Audra and Aubrey Williams. Vol. 1 in The Twickenham Edition of the Poems of Alexander Pope. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1961. ———. Peri Bathous: or, Martinus Scriblerus his Treatise of the Art of Sinking in Poetry. In Jonathan Swift. Miscellanies in Prose and Verse. 4 vols. London, 1727. 4:5–94. ———. The Works of Alexander Pope Esq. Ed. William Warburton. 9 vols. London, 1751. Quintero, Ruben. Literate Culture: Pope’s Rhetorical Art. Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press, 1992. Randall, Dale B. J. Winter Fruit: English Drama 1642–1660. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press, 1995. Rapin, René. The Whole Critical Works of Monsieur Rapin. 2 vols. London, 1706. Reedy, Gerard. “Rymer and History.” CLIO 7 (1978): 409–22. Ridpath, George. The Stage Condemn’d. London, 1698. Riggs, David. Ben Jonson: A Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989. Rogers, Pat. Grub Street: Studies in a Subculture. London: Methuen, 1972. ———. Hacks and Dunces: Pope, Swift and Grub Street. London: Methuen, 1980. Rose, Mark. Authors and Owners: The Invention of Copyright. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993. Rosenfeld, Sybil. “Dramatic Advertisements in the Burney Newspapers 1660–1700.” PMLA 51 (1936): 123–52. ———. “The Restoration Stage in Newspapers and Journal, 1660–1700.” MLR 30 (1935): 445–59. Rothstein, Eric. George Farquhar. TEAS 58. New York: Twayne, 1967. Rowe, George E. Distinguishing Jonson: Imitation, Rivalry, and the Direction of a Dramatic Career. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1988. Runge, Laura L. Gender and Language in British Literary Criticism, 1660–1790. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Rymer, Thomas. The Critical Works of Thomas Rymer. Ed. and intro. Curt A. Zimansky. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1956. Saintsbury, George. A History of Criticism and Literary Taste in Europe. 3 vols. Edinburgh: William Blackwood, 1900–04. 210 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Saunders, J. W. “The Stigma of Print: A Note on the Social Bases of Tudor Poetry.” Essays in Criticism 1 (1951): 139–64. Schmitz, Robert M. Pope’s Essay on Criticism 1709: A Study of the Bodleian Manuscript Text with Facsimiles, Transcripts, and Variants. St. Louis, MO: Washington University Press, 1962. Settle, Elkanah. A Defence of Dramatick Poetry. London, 1698. ———. A Farther Defence of Dramatick Poetry. London, 1698. ———. The New Athenian Comedy. London, 1693. ———. Notes and Observations on the Empress of Morocco Revised. London, 1674. Shadwell, Thomas. The Humorists. London, 1671. ———. The Miser. London, 1672. ———. The Sullen Lovers. London, 1668. Shakespeare, William. The Works of Mr. William Shakespear. Intro. Peter Holland. 7 vols. 1709; London: Pickering & Chatto, 1999. ———. The Works of Mr. William Shakespear. Volume the Seventh. London, 1710. Smallwood, Philip. Reconstructing Criticism: Pope’s Essay on Criticism and the Logic of Definition. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press, 2003. Sokal, Alan. “Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity.” Social Text 46/47 (1996): 217–52. Spence, Joseph. Observations, Anecdotes, and Characters of Books and Men. Ed. James M. Osborn. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966. Spingarn, J. E., ed. Critical Essays of the Seventeenth Century. 3 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1908. Steele, Richard. Mr. Steele’s Apology for Himself and his Writings. London, 1714. ———. The Tatler. Ed. Donald F. Bond. 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987. Steele, Richard and Joseph Addison. The Spectator. Ed. Donald F. Bond. 5 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. Sweeney, John Gordon III. Jonson and the Psychology of Public Theater. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985. Swift, Jonathan. A Tale of a Tub. Ed. A. C. Guthkelch and D. Nichol Smith. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1958. Taylor, Gary. Reinventing Shakespeare: A Cultural History from the Restoration to the Present. London: Hogarth Press, 1990. Trolander, Paul and Zeynep Tenger. “Criticism Against Itself: Subverting Critical Authority in Late-Seventeenth-Century England.” Philological Quarterly 75 (1996): 311–38. ———. “ ‘Impartial Critick’ or ‘Muse’s Handmaid’: The Politics of Critical Practice in the Early Eighteenth Century.” Essays in Literature 21 (1994): 26–42. Vanbrugh, John. A Short Vindication of The Relapse and The Provok’d Wife, from Immorality and Profaneness. London, 1698. Vickers, Brian, ed. English Renaissance Literary Criticism. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2001. Villiers, George, second Duke of Buckingham. The Rehearsal. Ed. D. E. L. Crane. Durham: University of Durham Publications, 1976. A Vindication of the Stage. London, 1698. BIBLIOGRAPHY 211

Waller, Edmund. Poems, &c. Written upon several Occasions, and to Several Persons. 8th ed. London, 1711. Watson, George. The Literary Critics: A Study of English Descriptive Criticism. Rev. ed. London: Hogarth Press, 1986. Wellek, René. The Later Eighteenth Century. Vol. 1 of A History of Modern Criticism: 1750–1950. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1955. ———. The Rise of English Literary History. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1941. Williams, Aubrey. “No Cloistered Virtue: Or, Playwright versus Priest in 1698.” PMLA 90 (1975): 234–46. Williams, William P. “Chetwin, Crooke, and the Jonson Folios.” Studies in Bibliography 30 (1977): 75–95. Williamson, George. The Senecan Amble: A Study in Prose Form from Bacon to Collier. London: Faber and Faber, 1951. Wilson, J. H. “Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters.” Theatre Notebook 15 (1961): 79–84. Wimsatt, William K., Jr. and Cleanth Brooks. Literary Criticism: A Short History. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1957. Winn, James Anderson. John Dryden and His World. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1987. Wiseman, Susan. Drama and Politics in the English Civil War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Womersley, David, ed. Augustan Critical Writing. London: Penguin, 1997. Wright, Louis B. “The Reading of Plays during the Puritan Revolution.” Huntington Library Bulletin 6 (1934): 73–108. Wycherley, William. The Plays of William Wycherley. Ed. Arthur Friedman. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979. The Young Students Library. London, 1692. Youngren, William H. “Addison and the Birth of Eighteenth-Century Aesthetics.” Modern Philology 79 (1982): 267–83. INDEX

Académie Française, 71–72, 81, Barbour, Richmond, 25, 186 n. 13 192 n. 21 Barish, Jonas, 31, 83, 194 n. 2 Addison, Joseph, 1, 5, 7–8, 14, 15–16, Baskerville, John, 200 n. 28 109, 116, 123, 134, 135, 137, Beaumont, Francis, 23 139, 140, 141, 147, 154, 155–57, Beaumont, Francis, and Fletcher, John, 158, 159, 160, 163, 165–69, 174, 35, 48, 93, 94 175, 177, 178, 179, 181, 198 n. 6 Rymer on, 14, 59, 60, 61, 65, 74, as Bickerstaff, 125, 162–63 75, 79 Dennis and, 17, 117, 120, 121, 122, Comedies and Tragedies Written by 124 Francis Beaumont and John as Mr. Spectator, 140, 161, 163–64, Fletcher Gentlemen, 33 165–67, 176–77, 179 see also Fletcher on Paradise Lost, 8, 129, 139, 140, Bedford, Arthur, 146, 147 156, 165, 166–67, 180, Evil and Danger of Stage-Plays, The, 200 n. 32 104, 143, 146 Cato, 117, 120, 121, 122 Serious Remonstrance In Behalf of the see also Bickerstaff, Mr. Spectator, Christian Religion, A, 104 Spectator, Steele, Tatler Behn, Aphra, 13, 49–52, 114, 125, Aeschylus, 69, 70, 71, 72 126, 149, 150, 184 n. 9 Persians, 78 Dryden and, 49, 50, 190 n. 50 Animadversions on Mr. Congreve’s Late and prefatory criticism, Answer to Mr. Collier, 101, 103 49–52 Anne, Queen, 141, 143 Dutch Lover, The, 50; dedication, 49, Archer, Stanley L., 189 n. 43 50–51, 52 Aristophanes Emperor of the Moon, The, dedication, Rymer and, 69–70, 73, 192 n. 19 51 Aristotle, 2, 39, 57, 58, 83, 88, 91, 97, Feign’d Curtizans, The, dedication, 116, 129, 175, 196 n. 7 51 Athenian Mercury, The Luckey Chance, The, 50; preface, 49, see Dunton 51–52 Atkins, J. W. H., 6, 59 Rover, The, postscript, 190 n. 48 Sir Patient Fancy, 50; dedication, 49 Bacon, Francis, 91 Young King, The, dedication, 51 Banks, John, 45, 74 Beljame, Alexandre, 198 n. 6 Innocent Usurper, The, 152 Bennet, Mother, 46, 86 214 INDEX

Benson, John Cartwright, William Poems: Written by Wil. Shake-speare. Comedies, Tragi-comedies, with other Gent., 197 n. 18 Poems, by Mr William Betterton, Thomas, 125, 160 Cartwright, 33 Bickerstaff, Isaac, 8, 16, 156–58, 159, Cecil, James, fourth Earl of Salisbury, 35 160–61, 164–65, 166, 167–69, Censure of the Rota, The 173, 174, 175, 177, 200 n. 26, see Rota pamphlets 200 n. 28, 200 n. 29 Cervantes Saavedra, Miguel de, 131 Addison as, 125, 162–63 Charles I, 143 as Censor of Great Britain, 8, Charles II, 73, 121, 141, 143, 178 16, 165 Cibber, Colley, 108, 164 Steele as, 157, 160, 161, 162, 163, Careless Husband, The; Tatler and, 164–65, 175, 200 n. 26 164, 200 n. 30 see also Addison, Steele, Tatler Clarke, Norma, 190 n. 47 Blackmore, Richard, 117 Collier, Jeremy, 14, 15, 16, 56, 81, 82, Prince Arthur, 120, 121; preface, 72, 83–108, 123, 142, 143, 146, 147, 85, 106 156, 160, 161, 168, 173, 174, Blayney, Peter W. M., 186 n. 9 177, 178 Blount, Charles Congreve and, 91, 94–95, 96–97, Mr. Dreyden Vindicated; see Rota 98, 100, 101, 102, 105, 113, pamphlets 194 n. 11 Blount, Thomas Pope Dennis and, 15, 104, 105–106, 108, De Re Poetica, 151, 199 n. 18 113–14 Boileau-Despréaux, Nicholas, 88, Dryden and, 85, 88, 89, 91, 112, 118 94, 99 Art Poétique, 179 Farquhar and, 104, 106–7, 108 Bond, Donald F., 161, 162, 200 n. 29 as “Master of the Revels”, 105–6 Bond, Richmond P., 156–57 Rymer and, 14, 56, 75, 79, 80, 81, Booth, Barton, 120 83, 85, 89–96, 98 Bosse, Malcolm J., 135 Steele and, 104, 106, 107–8, 161, Bossu, René Le, 2 195 n. 27 Boursault, Edmé, 145 Vanbrugh and, 85–86, 88, 90, 94, Boyle, Roger, Earl of Orrery, 95, 99, 100–101, 102, 113 34, 42 Defence of the Short View, A, 97, Brooks, Cleanth, 201 n. 11 102, 104 Brown, Tom, 115 Mr. Collier’s Dissuasive from the Lacedemonian Mercury, The, Play-House, 143, 199 n. 12 115, 151 Short View of the Immorality and Burt, Richard, 7–9, 84 Profaneness of the English Stage, Butler, Martin, 187 n. 20 A, 9–10, 14, 56, 72, 79, Bysshe, Edward 83–108, 113–14, 143, 194 n. 5, Art of English Poetry, The, 133 194 n. 8, 194 n. 11, 194 n. 13, 195 n. 18, 199 n. 14; audience Caffaro, Father Francisco, 145 of, 104; and authorial Cannan, Paul D., 193 n. 26, intention, 98–103; and 197 n. 16 burlesque criticism, 11, 84, INDEX 215

90–92, 104–5, 108; and satire on, 8, 16, 41–47, 111, 117, prefatory criticism, 85–90, 121, 124, 135–37, 162–64, 175 96, 103 see also names of individual critics Congreve, William, 85, 87, 94–95, 97, criticism 113, 115, 126, 131 and anti-theatricalism, 9–10, 14, 15, Amendments of Mr. Collier’s False and 16, 83–108, 140, 141–47, Imperfect Citations, 91, 96–97, 98, 160–61, 168, 178, 199 n. 12 100, 101, 102, 105, 194 n. 11 appreciative, 6, 8, 10, 15, 16, 36, Double-Dealer, The, 94, 95; 39, 156 dedication, 85, 87–88 audience of, 7, 15, 45, 74–76, Love for Love, 100, 102; Tatler and, 103–4, 110, 117, 118–20, 160, 164, 200 n. 28 125–26, 128, 129, 132–35, Mourning Bride, The, 90 137, 139–40, 144–45, 146, Old Batchelour, The, 95 153, 154, 155, 166–68, Works of Mr. William Congreve, 179–80, 181 The, 53 and audience response, 12, 47–48, see also Collier 56, 101–3, 119–20, 165, 172 Constable, John, 91 and authorial intention, 12, 23–32, Cooper, Anthony Ashley, third Earl of 39–40, 98–103, 163, 173 Shaftesbury and authorship, 12–13, 19–53, 114, Characteristicks of Men, Manners, 147, 152–53, 172–73 Opinions, Times, 63–64, burlesque, 4, 10–11, 14, 17, 63–65, 196 n. 8 84, 90–92, 104–5, 108, 117, Corneille, Pierre, 2, 33, 34, 88, 188 n. 129, 154, 176, 185 n. 21 29, 188 n. 30 and censorship, 7–10, 164, 177–78 Théodore, dedication, 71, 93 definitions, 6–12, 14, 16, 38–39, 83, Cowley, Abraham, 57, 58, 91, 115, 97–98, 118, 154, 181 126, 150 dramatized, 21, 24, 25–29, 31–32, Crane, R. S., 4 42, 76 Creech, Thomas, 178 and government regulation of the critic(s) stage, 9, 14, 56, 66, 69–73, 78, aristocratic, 8, 16, 110, 121, 131, 80, 81, 105–6, 108, 127–28, 134, 179, 202 n. 12 130, 135, 178, 192 n. 21, 192 as censor, 6, 7–10, 14, 56, 84, 163, n. 22, 197 n. 22 164–65, 177–78 impartiality in, 14, 56, 58–59, definitions, 6–12, 14, 16, 38–39, 61–62, 63, 129–30, 132, 83, 97–98, 111, 118, 154, 151, 153–55, 156, 158, 165, 162–63, 181 167, 168 fictitious, 15, 16, 148–49, 151, 155, journalistic, 7, 8, 15–16, 139–69, 156–69, 174 198 n. 1; serialized, 140, 166, journalist as, 15–16, 139–69, 174 168, 179, 181 poet as, 3, 19–53, 58, 60, 62, 109, moralistic, 14, 15, 97–98, 104, 110, 116, 126, 172–73, 106–8, 160–61 185 n. 3 neoclassical, 5, 56, 129, 139, 156 as profession, 14–15, 109–37 origin narratives, 1–8, 13, resistance toward, 16, 20, 21, 181 188 n. 29 216 INDEX criticism—continued Defoe, Daniel and patriotism, 57, 73, 75, 113, 123, Review, The, 15, 104, 140, 142–43, 180–81, 192 n. 23 147, 161, 168, 198 n. 5 politeness in, 176–77 Dennis, John, 1, 5, 8, 11, 14–15, populist, 15, 110, 121, 125–35, 151, 16–17, 19, 56, 63, 76–77, 82, 156, 167, 181 109–10, 114, 116–24, 129, 131, prefatory, 12–13, 20–53, 85–90, 96, 135–37, 141, 154, 156, 174, 176, 103, 126, 130–31, 172, 188 n. 177, 178, 179–80, 181, 201 n. 2, 29, 189 n. 40, 194 n. 5; 202 n. 13 modesty topos, 22–32, 34, Addison and, 17, 117, 120, 121, 40–41, 49, 174, 189 n. 36 122, 124 profession of, 109–37 and the audience of criticism, resistance toward, 3, 12, 13, 15, 16, 118–20 20, 21, 50, 52, 141, 168, Collier and, 14–15, 104, 105–6, 172, 181 108, 113–14 satire on, 8, 16, 35, 41–47, 50–51, criticism and patriotism, 123–24 137 criticism and religion, 106, 122–24 verse, 16, 52, 131, 134, 178–79, and didactic criticism, 17, 63, 105, 201 n. 11 117–18, 136, 176, 177 women readers of, 132–34 Dryden and, 113, 191 n. 7 see also names of individual critics early career, 112–14 Crowne, John Gildon and, 110, 114, 115, 116, Country Wit, The, 142 121, 126, 127, 131, 132, Notes and Observations on the Empress 135–37 of Morocco, 10 on Milton, 8, 181; Paradise Cunningham, Robert Newton, Lost, 119 199 n. 15 Pope and, 5–6, 17, 63, 116, 117, Curll, Edmund, 115, 125, 128, 119, 121, 124, 135–36, 175, 197 n. 17 179–80, 181, 201 n. 5, 201 n. 6, 202 n. 12 D’Aubignac, François Rymer and, 15, 56, 64, 66, 76–77, Hédelin l’Abbé 78, 81, 82, 90, 113, 117, Whole Art of the Stage, The, 57 192 n. 23, 196 n. 8 Dacier, André, 56, 131 as Sir Tremendous Longinus, 121 Essay upon Satyr, An, 126 Steele and, 8, 17, 107, 117, 120, Poetique d’Aristote, La, 79 121, 124, 136, 201 n. 6 Daily Courant, The, 141 Tatler on, 156, 157, 162–63, 168, Daily Post, The, 135 201 n. 6 Danchin, Pierre, 199 n. 11 and The Gentleman’s Journal, 112 Davenant, William, 32, 35, 42, 57, Advancement and Reformation of 58, 150 Modern Poetry, The, 15, 106, Gondibert, preface, 34 118, 122–23, 136; dedication, Tempest, The (with Dryden), 55 123 Day, John Appius and Virginia, 117, 201 n. 5 Humour out of Breath, dedication, Battle of Ramillia, The, 117, 124; 190 n. 51 preface, 124 INDEX 217

Britannia Triumphans, 124; preface, Remarks Upon Cato, 122 124 Remarks upon Several Passages in the Causes and the Decay and Defects of Preliminaries to the Dunciad, 136 Dramatick Poetry, The, 118 “Upon our Victory at Sea”, 112 Characters and Conduct of Sir John Usefulness of the Stage, The, 105, 106, Edgar, The, 136, 196 n. 8 113–14, 123 Comical Gallant, The, 118, 120 Description of the Academy of the Athenian Defence of Sir Fopling Flutter, A, 107 Virtuosi, A Essay on the Genius and Writings of see Rota pamphlets Shakespear, An, 8, 122, 193 n. Dillon, Wentworth, Earl of 30, 201 n. 6 Roscommon, 121, 178, 179, 180, Essay on the Opera’s, An, 17, 117, 181, 202 n. 12 123, 162 Essay on Translated Verse, An, 52, Grounds of Criticism in Poetry, The, 6, 134–35, 179 15, 105, 106, 119, 122–23, Doggett, Thomas, 164, 200 n. 28 124, 137 Drake, James Impartial Critick, The, 55, 64, 76, 78, Antient and Modern Stages Survey’d, 90, 105, 112, 113, 117, 127, The, 97, 105 154, 192 n. 23 Dryden, John, 1, 9, 10, 11, 12–13, 15, Invader of His Country, The, 16, 19–21, 24, 32–42, 49, 50, dedication, 197 n. 22 52–53, 56, 57, 58, 60, 62, 73, 74, “Large Account of the Taste in 81, 83, 94, 95, 108, 111–12, 114, Poetry, A”, 118, 120, 121 116, 117, 118, 122, 129, 134, Letters Upon Several Occasions, 113 141, 150, 152, 154, 155, 156, Liberty Asserted, 116, 124; preface, 160, 168, 175, 176, 177, 179, 123, 124 180–81, 184 n. 12, 188 n. 28, 188 Miscellaneous Tracts, 119, 124 n. 31, 188 n. 34, 188 n. 35, 188 Miscellanies in Verse and Prose, n. 36, 190 n. 1, 201 n. 2 112–13, 196 n. 9; preface, 112, attacks on, 42–49 120, 123 Behn and, 49, 50, 190 n. 50 New Project for the Regulation of the Collier and, 85, 88, 89, 91, 94, 99 Stage, A, 135–36, 137, Dennis and, 113, 191 n. 7 197 n. 21 as “father of English criticism”, 1–4, “On the Degeneracy of the Publick 13, 32, 53, 184 n. 9, 188 n. 29 Taste”, 118, 120 Gildon and, 115, 130–31, 132 Original Letters, 118 and prefatory criticism, 12–13, Person of Quality’s Answer to Mr. 32–42, 89, 103, 126, 130–31, Collier’s Letter, The, 105 172, 188 n. 29, 188 n. 30, Poems and Letters upon Several 189 n. 40 Occasions, 112 Rymer and, 3, 4, 13, 59–61, 62–63, Poems in Burlesque, 112 65, 66, 68, 72, 77, 78, 80, 108, Reflections upon An Essay upon 113, 176, 190 n. 6, 191 n. 7, Criticism, 63, 117, 119, 173, 191 n. 8, 191 n. 14, 192 n. 22, 175, 179–80, 181, 202 n. 12 193 n. 31 Remarks on Prince Arthur, 113, 117, Æneis, postscript, 202 n. 13 118, 120, 121; preface, 121 Alexander’s Feast, 180 218 INDEX

Dryden, John—continued Oedipus (with Lee), 74, 150; preface, All for Love, 74; preface, 37, 38, 40 189 n. 42 Amphitryon, 88, 94 “Of Heroique Playes”, 34 Annus Mirabilis, 47 Rival Ladies, The, 42; dedication, 34, Art of Poetry, The, 57, 179 35, 37, 47 Assignation, The, dedication, 45 Secret Love, 35; preface, 36, 40 Aureng-Zebe, dedication, 37 Sir Martin Marall, 100 “Authors Apology for Heroique Spanish Fryar, The, 35 Poetry, The”, 6, 38, 57 State of Innocence, The, 6 Cleomenes, 153–54; preface, 88 Tempest, The (with Davenant), 55 Conquest of Granada, The, 34, 37, 65, Troilus and Cressida, 2, 74, 119 111; epilogue, 60 Tyrannick Love, preface, 42 De Arte Graphica, preface, 78 Vindication of The Duke of Guise, “Defence of an Essay of Dramatique The, 41 Poesie”, 2, 47 Wild Gallant, The, 5 “Defence of the Epilogue”, 37, 44, Dunn, Kevin, 22, 40, 189 n. 40 49, 58, 60, 64 Dunton, John, 125, 152, 169, 174, 181 “Discourse concerning the Original Athenian Mercury, The, 15, 115, 140, and Progress of Satire”, 127 144–45, 147–48, 150–51, 155, Don Sebastian, 99, 150; preface, 38, 199 n. 18; and The Athenian 40, 63, 88 Society, 147, 148–49, 151, 155, Essay of Dramatick Poesie, An, 2, 4–5, 157, 169, 199 n. 16, 199 n. 17; 11, 38, 41, 42, 47, 48, 50, and The History of the Athenian 59–60, 65, 98, 111, 130, 132, Society, 115, 148–49, 155; and 174; dedication, 59, 63 The Young Students Library, 148, Evening’s Love, An, 42; preface, 34, 149–50 40, 42, 48–49, 85, 87 Life and Errors of John Dunton, The, Examen poeticum, 39; dedication, 4, 199 n. 16 38, 72, 77, 80, 191 n. 14, 192 Durfey, Thomas, 85, 87, 112, 114, 152 n. 22, 193 n. 33 Campaigners, The, preface, 90, 97 Fables Ancient and Modern, preface, Comical History of Don Quixote. The 39, 91, 189 n. 40 Third Part, The, preface, 85, 87 “Grounds of Criticism in Tragedy, Marriage-Hater Match’d, The, 115, 126 The”, 2, 13, 39, 60, 118 Dutton, Richard, 21, 186 n. 9, “Heads of an Answer to Rymer”, 193 n. 25 60, 62, 191 n. 8 Indian Emperour, The, 2, 43, 58, 68 Eagleton, Terry, 1, 7, 8, 181 Indian Queen, The (with Robert Engell, James, 3 Howard), 5, 47 Etherege, George King Arthur, 150; dedication, 88 Man of Mode, The; Spectator on, 82, Love Triumphant, dedication, 35 107, 161 MacFlecknoe, 112, 124 She wou’d if she cou’d, 121 Marriage A-la-Mode, dedication, 34 Notes and Observations on the Empress Farquhar, George of Morocco, 4, 10, 63, 64, 65, Collier and, 104, 106–7, 108 76, 84 “Discourse Upon Comedy, A”, 107 INDEX 219

Love and Business, 107 early career, 114–15 Twin-Rivals, The, 107; preface, 106 Pope and, 5, 15, 17, 135–36 Felton, Henry, 177 and populist criticism, 15, 125–35, Dissertation On Reading the Classics, 137 A, 156, 201 n. 9 Rymer and, 15, 66, 69, 72, 76–77, Finke, Laurie, 52, 189 n. 46, 190 n. 50 81, 82, 125, 127, 129–30, 131, Flecknoe, Richard, 35, 188 n. 35 192 n. 22, 193 n. 27, 196 n. 8 Love’s Dominion, 34 and The Gentleman’s Journal, 114, Love’s Kingdom, 34 115 Short Discourse of the English Stage, A, Chorus Poetarum, dedication, 127 34 Complete Art of Poetry, The, 15, 125, Fletcher, John, 67 131–34, 192 n. 22, 196 n. 7; Faithfull Shepheardesse, The, preface, 125 23–24, 93 Golden Spy, The, 124 see also Beaumont and Fletcher History of the Athenian Society, The, Folger Collective on Early Women 115, 144, 148–49, 155 Critics, 190 n. 47 Laws of Poetry, The, 131, 134–35 Fontenelle, Bernard le Bovier de “Letter to Mr. D’Urfey, A”, 115, 126 Entretiens sur la pluralité des mondes, Life of Mr. Thomas Betterton, The, 132 132–33 Lives and Characters of the English Foster, Dorothy, 199 n. 20 Dramatick Poets, The, 123, 127 Foucault, Michel, 19 Love’s Victim, preface, 126 Francis I of France, 71 Measure for Measure, 116 Frank, Marcie, 184 n. 9, 189 n. 46, Miscellaneous Letters and Essays, 15, 190 n. 50 69, 114, 115, 125, 127, 129, Friendly Vindication of Mr. Dryden, The 193 n. 27 see Rota pamphlets Miscellany Poems upon Several Occasions, 114, 126 Gascoigne, George, 2 New Project for the Regulation of the Gay, John Stage, A, 135–36, 137, 197 n. 21 Present State of Wit, The, 156 New Rehearsal, or Bays the Younger, Three Hours after Marriage, 121 A, 132, 196 n. 8 Gelber, Michael Werth, 184 n. 9, 185 Patriot, The, 126 n. 3, 189 n. 40 Phaeton, preface, 126 Gentleman’s Journal, The Post-boy rob’d of his Mail, The (1692), see Motteux 114, 115, 124, 126 Gildon, Charles, 5, 9, 14–15, 16, 56, Post-Boy Robb’d of his Mail, The 70, 76, 81, 82, 109–10, 112, (1706), 127 124–37, 141, 154, 156, 174, 179, Post-Man Robb’d of his Mail, The, 180, 181, 196 n. 4 124, 127–28, 135, 192 n. 22, as “Charles Dickson”, 127–28, 192 197 n. 22 n. 22, 197 n. 22 Works of Mr. William Shakespear. Collier and, 15, 108 Volume the Seventh, The, 6, 15, Dennis and, 110, 114, 116, 121, 77, 114, 125, 127, 128–31, 126, 127, 131, 132, 135–37 135, 179, 192 n. 22, 197 n. 16, Dryden and, 115, 130–31, 132 197 n. 17 220 INDEX

Gosson, Stephen, 83 Jackson, Alfred, 199 n. 10 Gould, Robert, 85 James II, 73, 141 Graham, Walter, 144, 145, 154–55, Johnson, Samuel, 2–4, 39, 77 198 n. 1 Jonson, Ben, 1, 2, 11, 12–13, 14, 16, Granville, George, Baron Lansdowne 19–21, 24–32, 34, 35, 36, 40, 41, Concerning Unnatural Flights in Poetry, 48, 51, 52–53, 56, 59, 60, 67, 88, 134–35 93, 95, 97, 150, 172, 175, Gray, Charles Harold, 198 n. 1 185 n. 4, 190 n. 48 and dramatized criticism, 21, 24, H., I., Esq 25–29, 31–32 Stage Vindicated: A Satyr, The, 146 and prefatory criticism, 12–13, Habermas, Jürgen, 6–7 24–32, 172, 174 Hammond, Brean S., 184 n. 15 Alchemist, The, dedication, 26, 27, Haym, Nicola 29, 187 n. 18 Pyrrhus and Demetrius, 162 Bartholomew Fair, 28, 187 n. 17 Hellinger, Benjamin, 92 Catiline, 27, 44, 64, 78, 193 n. 35; Heraclitus Ridens, 142 dedication, 26–27, 28, 29, Herringman, Henry, 33, 34, 47, 187 n. 18 188 n. 31 Cynthia’s Revels, 27 Heywood, Thomas Discoveries, 30, 36 Golden Age, The, 22, 23 Every Man In His Humour, 28 Higden, Henry Every Man Out of His Humor, 24–25, Wary Widdow, The, 153 28, 29, 180, 187 n. 18 Hohendahl, Peter Uwe, 7 Magnetick Lady, The, 28 Holland, Peter, 197 n. 17 New Inne, The, 28, 29–30; Hooker, Edward Niles, 17, 119, argument, 30; dedication, 29; 176, 193 n. 34, 197 n. 21, “Ode to himselfe”, 30 201 n. 8 Poetaster, 25, 28, 187 n. 18 Horace, 2, 149, 177, 178–79 Sejanus, 27, 30, 186 n. 16, 187 n. Hotch, Ripley, 201 n. 7 17, 187 n. 18; argument, 30, Howard, Edward, 38, 42 187 n. 23; dedication, 24, 26, Howard, James, 42 29, 31, 34, 40, 78, 193 n. 35 Howard, Robert, 38, 42, 49, 50 Staple of Newes, The, 28, 30 vs Dryden, 47–48 Volpone, dedication, 24, 26, 28, 31, Duke of Lerma, The, 47; dedication, 34, 40 47–48 Workes of Benjamin Jonson, The, 19, Four New Plays, dedication, 47 21, 27–28, 31, 52, 53, 186 n. Indian Queen, The (with Dryden), 13, 187 n. 17, 187 n. 18, 5, 47 187 n. 20 Hume, Robert D., 84, 185 n. 20, 188 Jovial Mercury, The, 151 n. 26, 188 n. 27, 188 n. 35, 193 n. 28, 194 n. 4, 195 n. 24, Kewes, Paulina, 186 n. 9, 188 n. 27, 198 n. 7 188 n. 32, 192 n. 21, 200 n. 21 Humours, and Conversations of the Town, Killigrew, Charles, 9, 105, 192 n. 20 The, 111 Killigrew, Thomas, 32 INDEX 221

Kinservik, Matthew J., 9, 106, 185 n. Moseley, Humphrey, 33, 60 18, 185 n. 19, 192 n. 20, 194 n. Motteux, Peter 3, 195 n. 24 Beauty in Distress, preface, 199 n. 14 Kirkman, Francis, 60 Gentleman’s Journal, The, 15, 139, Kirsch, Arthur C., 36 140, 145–46, 147–48, 151–55, Knellwolf, Christa, 202 n. 15 157, 160, 161, 168, 199 n. 15, Kramer, David Bruce, 188 n. 29, 199 n. 19, 199 n. 20; and 188 n. 30 authorship, 112, 114, 152–53; Krutch, Joseph Wood, 83, 89, 94, 95, on Cleomenes, 153–54; Dennis 192 n. 22, 195 n. 15 and, 112; Gildon and, 114, 115 Love’s a Jest, 152 Ladies Mercury, The, 151 Munns, Jessica, 51, 189 n. 46 Langbaine, Gerard, 127, 155, Muses Mercury, The 181, 191 n. 13, 200 n. 21 see Oldmixon Account of the English Dramatick Poets, An, 94, 150, 153 Newton, Richard C., 185 n. 4 Momus Triumphans, 65, 149; Nichols, John, 200 n. 29 preface, 192 n. 21 Nisbet, H. B., 183 n. 3, 185 n. 1 Lee, Nathaniel, 45, 74, 75 Oedipus (with Dryden), 74 Observator, The Letter to Mr. Congreve, A, 101, 103 see Tutchin Lintott, Bernard, 197 n. 18 Oldham, John, 178 Locke, John, 201 n. 2 Oldmixon, John Lockier, Francis, 112 Essay on Criticism, An, 82, 91, 109 Loftis, John, 195 n. 27, 200 n. 29 History of England, The, 195 n. 23 Longinus, 173 Muses Mercury, The, 139, 140, 146–47, 154–55, 160, 161, 168 Macdonald, Hugh, 196 n. 5 Reflections on the Stage, 90, 91, 96, MacIntosh, Fred Henry, 196 n. 4 97, 194 n. 8 Mack, Maynard, 179, 200 n. 1 Osborn, James M., 188 n. 31 Manley, Delarivier, 50, 184 n. 9 Otway, Thomas, 45, 74, 75, 131, 150 Markley, Robert, 46 Marsden, Jean I., 65, 76, 101 Palmer, Barbara Villiers, Countess of Mary II, 73 Castlemaine and Duchess of Meres, Francis, 11 Cleveland, 46 Milhous, Judith, 188 n. 27, 198 n. 7 Parks, Stephen, 199 n. 16 Milton, John, 81, 127, 151, 168, 181 Partridge, John, 157 Paradise Lost, 119, 193 n. 36; Payne, Deborah C., 50, 52, 189 n. 46 Spectator on, 129, 139, 140, Pelham-Holles, Thomas, Duke of 156, 165, 166–67, 180, Newcastle, 197 n. 22 200 n. 32 Pepys, Samuel, 111, 188 n. 36 Samson Agonistes, 78, 193 n. 36 Philips, Ambrose Miner, Earl, 66, 67 Distrest Mother, The; Spectator Montagu, Lady Mary Wortley, 171 on, 165 Morris, David B., 201 n. 2 Philips, Katherine, 149, 150 222 INDEX

Phillips, Edward Review, The Theatrum Poetarum, 78 see Defoe Pope, Alexander, 5, 16, 67, 77, 81, Rich, Christopher, 127 116, 123, 130, 134, 137, 171–81 Richelieu, Cardinal, 71, 192 n. 21 Dennis and, 5–6, 15, 17, 63, 116, Ridpath, George 117, 119, 121, 124, 135–36, Stage Condemn’d, The, 104 175, 179–80, 181, 197 n. 23, Riggs, David, 27 201 n. 5, 201 n. 6, 202 n. 12 Rogers, Pat, 5 Gildon and, 5–6, 15, 17, 135–36, Rose, Mark, 13 197 n. 23 Rota pamphlets, 12, 44–45, 60, 63, Critical Specimen, The, 124 64–65, 76, 84, 111 Dunciad, The, 5, 15, 116, 124, 136 Censure of the Rota, The, 44, 65, 111 Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot, An, 136, Description of the Academy of the 197 n. 23 Athenian Virtuosi, A, 44, 64, Essay on Criticism, An, 6, 16, 117, 111, 185 n. 21 121, 171–81, 200 n. 1, Friendly Vindication of Mr. Dryden, 201 n. 2, 201 n. 4, 201 n. 5, The, 44, 45, 111 201 n. 6, 201 n. 7, 201 n. 11, Mr. Dreyden Vindicated, 44 202 n. 12, 202 n. 15 Rothstein, Eric, 195 n. 26 New Project for the Regulation of the Rowe, George E., 187 n. 17 Stage, A, 135–36, 137 Rowe, Nicholas, 77, 130 Peri Bathous, 136 Works of Mr. William Shakespear, Post Man, The, 104 The, 127, 128–29, 179, Powell, George, 142 197 n. 17, 197 n. 18 Predictions for the Year 1708, 157 Runge, Laura L., 52, 189 n. 46 Prynne, William, 83 Rymer, Thomas, 1, 3–4, 13–14, 15, Histrio-mastix, 85 16, 17, 19, 38, 55–82, 85, 96, Purcell, Henry, 152 102, 103, 109–10, 117, 118, 119, Puttenham, George, 2, 11 122, 131, 134, 143, 156, 176, 179, 180, 181, 190 n. 6, 192 n. Quintero, Ruben, 201 n. 7 21, 192 n. 22, 193 n. 30 Quintilian, 27 Collier and, 14, 56, 72, 75, 79, 80, 81, 83, 85, 89–96, 98 Racine, Jean, 2 criticism and government regulation Rapin, René, 55, 56, 88, 91, 94, 97 of the stage, 9, 56, 66, 69–73, Reflexions sur la poetique, 14, 56–59, 78, 80–81, 130, 178, 192 n. 20, 61–62, 79 192 n. 22, 192 n. 25, 194 n. 14 Whole Critical Works of Monsieur Dennis and, 15, 56, 64, 66, 76–77, Rapin, The, 91 78, 81, 82, 90, 113, 117, Ravenscroft, Edward 192 n. 23 London Cuckolds, The; Tatler on, 160 Dryden and, 3, 4, 13, 59–61, 62–63, Rawson, Claude, 183 n. 3, 185 n. 1 65, 66, 68, 72, 77, 78, 80, 108, Redwine, James D., Jr., 185 n. 5 113, 176, 190 n. 1, 190 n. 6, Reedy, Gerard, 67, 192 n. 19 191 n. 7, 191 n. 8, 191 n. 14, Reflection on our Modern Poesy, A, 85 192 n. 22, 193 n. 31 INDEX 223

Gildon and, 15, 66, 69, 72, 76–77, Libertine, The, 49 81, 82, 125, 127, 129–30, 131, Miser, The, preface, 49 192 n. 22, 193 n. 27, 196 n. 8 Notes and Observations on the Empress Edgar, 60, 62, 116, 190 n. 1 of Morocco, 10 Foedera, 73 Psyche, 49 preface to Rapin, 14, 55, 56–59, 60, Sullen Lovers, The, preface, 48, 49 61, 68, 79, 85 Shakespeare, William, 20, 28, 35, 48, Short View of Tragedy, A, 3, 10, 11, 67, 85, 90, 93, 95, 98, 120, 122, 13, 14, 17, 55, 56, 59, 60, 64, 127, 128–31, 150, 153, 168, 192 65–81, 82, 90, 92, 93, 94, 98, n. 25, 193 n. 27, 193 n. 28, 113, 115, 119, 123, 128, 149, 197 n. 16 191 n. 14, 191 n. 15, 192 n. Rymer on, 3–4, 14, 17, 55, 59, 19, 192 n. 23, 193 n. 27, 193 60, 66, 73, 79, 81, 128, n. 35, 194 n. 14 129–30; Othello, 3, 13, Tragedies of the Last Age, The, 4, 11, 55, 74–78, 94 14, 52, 53, 55, 59–63, 66, 67, Hamlet, 142 68, 74–76, 79, 84, 85, 90, 92, Much Ado About Nothing, 129 94, 119, 184 n. 11, 190 n. 1, Poems: Written by Wil. Shake-speare. 191 n. 8, 193 n. 36 Gent., 197 n. 18 Rape of Lucrece, The, 197 n. 18 Sackville, Charles, Lord Buckhurst, Venus and Adonis, 197 n. 18 Earl of Dorset, 38, 190 n. 1 Works of Mr. William Shakespear, Saintsbury, George, 1, 6, 55 The, 127, 128–29, 179, Sanger, Egbert, 128, 197 n. 17 197 n. 17, 197 n. 18 Sappho, 151 Works of Mr. William Shakespear. Sault, Richard, 148, 199 n. 16 Volume the Seventh, The, 6, 15, Saunders, J. W., 22 77, 114, 125, 127, 128–31, Scarlatti, Alessandro, 162 135, 179, 192 n. 22, 197 n. 16, Schmitz, Robert M., 200 n. 1 197 n. 17 Scott, Walter, 35 Sheffield, John, Earl of Mulgrave, 131, Sedley, Charles, 38, 112, 152, 153 179, 202 n. 12 Seneca, 194 n. 10 Essay upon Poetry, An, 131, Settle, Elkanah, 4, 10, 65 134–35, 178 Defence of Dramatick Poetry, A, Sidney, Philip, 11 89, 105 Smallwood, Philip, 183 n. 3, 200 n. 1 Empress of Morocco, The, 10 Soame, William Farther Defence of Dramatick Poetry, A, Art of Poetry, The, 57, 179 83, 98, 100, 105 Society for the Reformation of New Athenian Comedy, The, 148–49 Manners, 16, 143 Notes and Observations on the Empress Socrates, 69 of Morocco Revised, 10 Sokal, Alan, 177 Shadwell, Thomas, 38, 47, 50, 124 Sophocles, 69, 70 vs Dryden, 48–49, 87 Southerne, Thomas Humorists, The, preface, 48–49, 87 Sir Anthony Love, 153 Lancashire Witches, The, 49 Wives Excuse, The, 153 224 INDEX

Spectator, Mr., 8, 16, 133, 140, 156, Tate, Nahum, 74, 112, 152 157–60, 161, 162, 163–64, History of King Lear, The, 55 167–69, 173, 174, 176–77, 179, “Proposal for Regulating the Stage, 180, 200 n. 26 A”, 72, 192 n. 22 Addison as, 140, 161, 163–64, Tatler, The, 8, 15, 16, 82, 117, 125, 165–67, 171, 179, 180, 133, 135, 139, 141, 147, 151, 200 n. 26 155–58, 159, 160–61, 162–63, Steele as, 161, 165, 166 164–65, 167–69, 171, 174, 175, Spectator, The, 8, 15, 16, 82, 107, 117, 178, 179, 200 n. 25, 200 n. 26, 129, 133, 135, 139, 140, 141, 200 n. 28 151, 155–60, 161, 162, 163–64, Jenny Distaff, 159 165–69, 171, 174, 178, 179, 193 Sir Timothy Tittle, 162–63 n. 30, 198 n. 6, 200 n. 26, see also Addison, Bickerstaff, Steele 200 n. 27 Taylor, Gary, 81 Spectator Club, 159–60; Sir Roger Tempest, The (1674), 55 de Coverly, 159, 165; The Temple, William, 91 Templar (staff critic), 159–60; Tenger, Zeynep, 11, 172, 183 n. 3 Will Honeycomb, 165 Terence, 93, 126, 194 n. 13 see also Addison, Mr. Spectator, Tonson, Jacob, 73, 193 n. 31 Steele Miscellany Poems, 115 Spenser, Edmund, 57 Ovid’s Epistles, Translated by Several Spingarn, J. E., 90 Hands, 115 Steele, Richard, 1, 5, 7–8, 15–16, 56, Poetical Works of Mr. John Milton, 108, 123, 135, 137, 139, 140, The, 200 n. 32 141, 147, 155–65, 167–69, 175, Satires of Decimus Junius Juvenalis, 177, 178, 179, 181 Translated, The, 127 as Bickerstaff, 157, 160, 161, 162, Works of Mr. William Shakespear, 163, 164–65 The, 128, 197 n. 17, 197 n. 18 Collier and, 14, 104, 106, 107–8, Trolander, Paul, 11, 172, 183 n. 3 161, 195 n. 27 Trotter, Catharine, 184 n. 9 Dennis and, 8, 17, 117, 120, 121, True Character of Mr. Pope and His 124, 136, 201 n. 6 Writings, A, 136 as Mr. Spectator, 161, 165, 166 Tutchin, John, 143 Conscious Lovers, The, 200 n. 29 Observator, The, 140, 142, 143, 146, Lying Lover, The, 107 147, 161, 199 n. 12, 199 n. 13 Mr. Steele’s Apology for Himself and his Writings, 107 Vanbrugh, John, 85–86, 94, 95, 99, Theatre, The, 136 113, 127 see also Addison, Bickerstaff, Mr. Provok’d Wife, The, 95, 99, 101, 143, Spectator, Spectator, Tatler 195 n. 18; prologue, 86 Sweeney, John Gordon, III, 186 n. 16, Relapse, The, 88, 95, 102, 107; 187 n. 17 preface, 85–86 Swift, Jonathan, 5, 16, 38 Short Vindication of The Relapse, A, Tale of a Tub, A, 5, 35, 44 90, 100–101, 102 Swiney, Owen see also Collier Pyrrhus and Demetrius, 162 Vickers, Brian, 185 n. 22, 186 n. 6 INDEX 225

Villiers, George, second Duke of Willan, Leonard Buckingham Orgula, 34 Rehearsal, The, 3, 10, 21, 35, 42–44, William III, 73 45, 75, 76, 84, 92, 94, 150, Williams, Aubrey, 83 172, 173, 176; as a model for Williamson, George, 194 n. 10 criticism, 10, 63–64, 76; Wilmot, John, second Earl of influence of, 44–47, 50, 53, 56, Rochester, 34, 150, 188 n. 34 63–64, 76, 81, 121 Wimsatt, William K., Jr., 201 n. 11 Vindication of the Stage, A, 87, 99, 194 Winn, James Anderson, 188 n. 31, n. 6 188 n. 34 Womersley, David, 81, 193 n. 39 Waller, Edmund, 73, 115, 127, Wright, James, 85 192 n. 23 Wycherley, William, 45–47, 60, 95, “Account of the Life and Writings 113, 125 of Edmond Waller, An”, 63 Country-Wife, The; Tatler on, 160, Walsh, William, 121, 179, 180–81, 161 202 n. 13, 202 n. 15 Love in a Wood, dedication, 45 Warburton, William, 202 n. 15 Plain-Dealer, The, 121; dedication, Warton, Thomas, 67 45–47, 51, 85, 86 Watson, George, 4, 6, 19, 36, 41, 59, 118, 179, 184 n. 12, 188 n. 29 Young Students Library, The, 148, Wellek, René, 1, 67, 68–69 149–50 Welsted, Leonard see also Dunton Dissembled Wanton, The, 200 n. 29 Wesley, Samuel, 148, 199 n. 16 Zimansky, Curt, 55, 66, 67, 68, 74, Wilks, Robert, 164, 200 n. 30 80, 83, 184 n. 11