Prefaces to Four Seventeenth-Century Romances: Roger Boyle, Lord Broghill, preface to Parthenissa (1655) Sir George Mackenzie, "Apologie for romances," prefixed to Aretina, the serious romance (1660) Nathaniel Ingelo, preface to Bentivolio and Urania (1660) Robert Boyle, preface to Theodora and Didymus (1687)Boyle, Roger, Earl of Orrery
General
Prefaces to Four Seventeenth-Century Romances: Roger Boyle, Lord Broghill, preface to Parthenissa (1655) Sir George Mackenzie, "Apologie for romances," prefixed to Aretina, the serious romance (1660) Nathaniel Ingelo, preface to Bentivolio and Urania (1660) Robert Boyle, preface to Theodora and Didymus (1687)
Boyle, Roger, Earl of Orrery
English fiction -- Early modern, 1500-1700; Prefaces
_I know that these who have devanced us in this imployment, will as our
oldest brothers in time, have a double portion of fame bestowed upon them,
and no wonder, seing they had store both of expression and invention to
make choice of, and if any of us use their expressions, albeit we were
only debtor to our own invention for them, yet we should be thought to
plagiarize: wherefore he who writes now, should read what hath been
written formerly; not to the intent that he may borrow, but least he
should borrow any thing that is theirs. I perceive there have been two
errours committed by the first writers of Romances: the first was, that
they stuffed their Books with things impracticable, which because they
were above the reach of mans power, they should never have fallen within
the circle of his observation: and such was =Amadis de Gaule=, =Palmeron
de Oliva= =&c.= The other errour was in the style, which because of its
soaring pitch was inimitable: and as the first hath been the fault of the
first writers, So the last hath been the fault of the last writers,
wherefore the famous =Scuderie= hath written so, as that his invention may
suit well with our practice, and his style with our discourse, and
especially in his =Clelia=, wherein he professes that he hath adapted all
to the present converse of the French Nation and that is really the mould
wherein all tru Romances should be casten. There are some who embroider
their discourse with Latin and Greek termes, thinking, like these who are
charmers, that the charme loses its energie, if the words be not used in
Latine. But this is as ridiculous, as if one who desires to make his face
seem pleasant, should enamble it with red, blew, green, and other colours;
which though they are in themselves pleasant, yet are rediculous when
placed there. And this is an university style, which favours too much its
pedant, and is at best but bastard oratory, seing the scope of all Orators
is to perswade, and there can be no perswasion where the term is not
understood; examples of this are =Brown=, =Charletoun=, =&c.= The second
style, is that of moral Philosophers, where the periods are short, and the
sense strong, and our experience teacheth us, that the shorter any thing
be, it is the stronger: this style suits best with Preachers, whose it is
to debit the grand misteries of Faith and Religion; for, seing sentences
there should be weighty, if they were either many, or long, they would
burden too much the hearers. The third style, is that of =Barrasters=,
which is flourished with similees, and where are used long winded periods;
and of all others, this is the most preferable, for seing similitude is
but a harmony, this style shews that excellent harmony; and rapport,
which God intended in the first Creation; and which the Philosophers of
all ages have ever since admired. This Lawyers have learned from the
paucitie of all humane Lawes, which makes them oft recurr to that topick,
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account