the entire roof of the church was consumed*. The description in this simile was probably suggested to our author's imagination by this remarkable accident.

* Stow's Survey of London, p. 357. edit. 1633.

POSTSCRIPT.

AT the close of this work, I shall beg leave to subjoin an apology, for the manner in which it has been conducted and executed.

I presume it will be objected, that these remarks would have appeared with greater propriety, connected with Spenser's text, and arranged according to their respective references; at least it may be urged, that such a plan would have prevented much unnecessary transcription. But I was dissuaded from this by two reasons. The first is, that

these Observations, thus reduced to general heads*, form a series of distinct essays on Spenser, and exhibit a course of systematical criticism on the Faerie Queene. But my principal argument was, that a formal edition of this poem, with notes, would have been at once impertinent and superfluous; as two publications of Spenser, under that form, are at present expected from the hands of two learned and ingenious criticst. Besides, it was never my design to give so complete and perpetual a comment on every part of our author, as such an attempt seemed to

require. But while some passages are entirely overlooked, or but superficially touched, others will be found to have been discussed more at large, and investigated with greater research and accuracy, than such an attempt would have permitted.

* Except in Sections ix. xi.

+ One of these has since appeared.

1

As to more particular objections, too many, I am sensible, must occur; one of which will probably be, that I have been more diligent in remarking the faults than the beauties of Spenser. That I have been deficient in encomiums on particular passages, did not proceed from a want of perceiving or acknowledging beauties; but from a persuasion, that nothing is more absurd or useless than the panegyrical comments of those, who criticise from the imagination rather than from the judgment, who exert their admiration instead of their reason, and discover more of enthusiasm than discernment. And this will most commonly be the case of those critics, who profess to point out beauties; because, as they naturally approve themselves to the reader's apprehension by their own force, no reason can often be given why they please: The same cannot always be said of faults, which

I have frequently displayed without reserve or palliation,

1

It was my chief aim to give a clear and comprehensive estimate, of the characteristical merits and manner, of this admired, but neglected, poet. For this purpose. I have considered the customs and genius of his age; I have searched his cotemporary writers, and examined the books on which the peculiarities of his style, taste, and composition, are confessedly founded.

I fear I shall be censured for quoting too

many pieces of this sort. But experience has frequently and fatally proved, that the commentator whose critical enquiries are employed on Spenser, Jonson, and the rest of our elder poets, will in vain give specimens of his classical erudition, unless, at the same time, he brings to his work a mind intimately acquainted with those books, which