The progress of genuine prose in Portuguese literature during the eighteenth century, may, upon the whole, be estimated by the style of Portuguese criticism in the same period. It may be presumed that the authors of critical treatises on literary subjects, endeavoured by their own prose to shew the relationship, which, according to their opinion, ought to exist between poetry and eloquence; and it is certain that the principles on which they wrote precisely corresponded with the rhetorical cultivation of the age, within the boundaries of Portuguese taste. These theoretical labours, in their relation to Portuguese poetry and eloquence, deserve to be particularly noticed. ERICEYRA’S INTRODUCTION TO HIS HENRIQUEIDA. A new epoch in Portuguese criticism seems to commence with the critical treatises of the Count da Ericeyra; for this writer studiously availed himself of the principles of French criticism, and his authority gave full effect to the example he set. But there was more of semblance than reality in Ericeyra’s appropriation of French criticism. He had too little feeling for the essence of poetry to be able to modify the idea of beauty according to French principles of correctness, without losing sight of the true foundation of that idea. With all his critical rules, therefore, he never rose above what may be termed the external apparatus of poetry. Within that apparatus his taste was altogether circumscribed. His general opinions on poetry are developed with sufficient clearness in the copious introduction to his _Henriqueida_,[399] and in the explanatory notes which he has attached to that epic composition. The introductory dissertation is written in good prose; but the observations which the author makes on the subject of epic poetry, partake more of prosaic than of poetic views. The subject with which the Count da Ericeyra’s critical essay commences is imitation; but, composing in the spirit of his own system, he first speaks of the celebrated poets whose works he had imitated, and afterwards of the imitation of nature. He speaks of Homer with emphasis; and yet at the same time acknowledges that he was acquainted with that poet only through Madame Dacier’s prose translation. Under these circumstances he reasonably enough speaks with still greater emphasis of Virgil, whose works he could read in the original. Of all human works, Virgil’s Æneid, in the opinion of Ericeyra, approaches nearest to perfection.[400] On the other hand, he says, that Ariosto’s Orlando Furioso, belongs more properly to the class of romantic tales of chivalry, than to epic poetry; but that it is nevertheless worthy of imitation on account of its pleasing narrative style and the “fertility of poetic genius,” which the Count acknowledges Ariosto to possess. Voltaire’s Henriade, however, which was then the newest epic production, is pronounced to be particularly distinguished for its “elevated and natural poetry.” Ericeyra takes this opportunity of