even a biographer who should write the life of Achilles
would connect the events by showing their mutual dependence
and relation； as much as a poet who should make the anger of
that hero the subject of his narration。＇10＇ Not only in any
limited portion of life a man's actions have a dependence on
each other； but also curing the whole period of his duration
from the cradle to the grave； nor is it possible to strike
off one link； however minute； in this regular chain without
affecting the whole series of events which follow。 The unity
of action； therefore； which is to be found in biography or
history differs from that of epic poetry； not in kind； but
in degree。 In epic poetry； the connection among the events
is more close and sensible； the narration is not carried on
through such a length of time； and the actors hasten to some
remarkable period which satisfies the curiosity of the
reader。 this conduct of the epic poet depends on that
particular situation of the imagination and of the passions
which is supposed in that production。 The imagination both
of writer and reader is more enlivened； and the passions
more inflamed than in history； biography； or any species of
narration that confine themselves to strict truth and
reality。 Let us consider the effect of these two
circumstances of an enlivened imagination and inflamed
passions which belong to poetry； especially the epic kind；
above any other species of composition； and let us see for
what reason they require a stricter and closer unity in the
fable。
； all poetry； being a species of painting；
approaches us nearer to the objects than any other species
of narration； throws a stronger light upon them； and
delineates more distinctly those minute circumstances which；
though to the historian they seem superfluous； serve
mightily to enliven the imagery and gratify the fancy。 If it
be not necessary； as in the ； to inform us each time
the hero buckles his shoes and ties his garters； it will be
requisite； perhaps； to enter into a greater detail than in
the ； where the events are run over with such
rapidity that we scarce have leisure to become acquainted
with the scene or action。 Were a poet； therefore； to
comprehend in his subject any great compass of time or
series of events； and trace up the death of Hector to its
remote causes in the rape of Helen or the judgment of Paris；
he must draw out his poem to an immeasurable length in order
to fill this large canvass with just painting and imagery。
The reader's imagination； inflamed with such a series of
poetical descriptions； and his passions； agitated by a
continual sympathy with the actors； must flag long before
the period of narration and must sink into lassitude and
disgust from the repeated violence of the same movements。
； that an epic poet must not trace the causes
to any great distance will further appear if we consider
another reason； which is drawn from a property of the
passions still more remarkable and singular。 It is evident
that in a just composition all the affections excited by the
different events described and represented add mutual force
to each other； and that； while the heroes are all engaged in
one common scene； and each action is strongly connected with
the whole； the concern is continually awake； and the
passions make an easy transition from one object to another。
The strong connection of the events； as it facilitates the
passage of the thought or imagination from one to another；
facilitates also the transfusion of the passions and
preserves the affection still in the same channel and
direction。 Our sympathy and concern for Eve prepares the way
for a like sympathy with Adam： The affection is preserved
almost entire in the transition； and the mind seizes
immediately the new object as strongly related to that which
formerly engaged its attention。 But were the poet to make a
total digression from his subject and introduce a new actor
no way connected with the personages； the imagination；
feeling a breach in the transition； would enter coldly into
the new scene； would kindle by slow degrees； and in
returning to the main subject of the poem would pass； as it
were； upon foreign ground and have its concern to excite
anew in order to take party with the principal actors。 The
same inconvenience follows in a lesser degree where the poet
traces his events to too great a distance and binds together
actions which； though not altogether disjoined； have not so
strong a connection as is requisite to forward the
transition of the passions。 Hence arises the artifice of
oblique narration employed in the and
where the hero is introduced； at first； near the period of
his designs； and afterwards shows us； as it were in
perspective； the more distant events and causes。 By this
means； the reader's curiosity is immediately excited； the
events follow with rapidity； and in a very close connection；
and the concern preserved alive； and continually increases
by means of the near relation of the objects； from the
beginning to the end of the narration。
The same rule takes place in dramatic poetry； nor is it
ever permitted in a regular composition to introduce an
actor who has no connection； or but a small one； with the
principle personages of the fable。 The spectator's concern
must not be diverted by any scenes disjoined and separated from
the rest。 This breaks the course of the passions； and
prevents that communication of the several emotions by which
one scene adds force to another； and transfuses the pity and
terror which it excites upon each succeeding scene until the
whole produces that rapidity of movement which is peculiar
to the theater。 How must it extinguish this warmth or
affection to be entertained on a sudden with a new action
and new personages no way related to the former； to find so
sensible a breach or vacuity in the course of the passions；
by means of this breach in the connection of ideas； and
instead of carrying the sympathy of one scene into the
following； to be obliged every moment to excite a new
concern； and take party in a new scene of action？
But though this rule of unity of action be common to
dramatic and epic poetry； we may still observe a difference
betwixt them which may； perhaps； deserve our attention。 In
both these species of composition it is requisite the action
be one and simple； in order to preserve the concern or
sympathy entire and undiverted： But in epic or narrative
poetry； this rule is also established upon another
foundation； /VIZ。 the necessity that is incumbent on every
writer to form some plan or design before he enter on any
discourse or narration； and to comprehend his subject in
some general aspect or united view which may be the constant
object of his attention。 As the author is entirely lost in
dramatic compositions； and the spectator supposes himself to
be really present at the actions represented； this reason
has no place with regard to the stage； but any dialogue or
conversation may be introduced which； without improbability；
might have passed in that determinate portion of space
represented by the theater。 Hence； in all our English
comedies； even those of C/ONGREVE； the unity of action is
never strictly observed； but the poet thinks it sufficient
if his personages be any way related to each other by blood；
or by living in the same family； and he afterwards
introduces them in particular scenes； where they display
their humors and characters without much forwarding the main
action。 The double plots of T/ERENCE are licenses of the
same kind； but in a lesser degree。 And though this conduct
be not perfectly regular； it is not wholly unsuitable to the
nature of comedy； where the movements and passions are not
raised to such a height as in tragedy； at the same time that
the fiction or representation palliates； in come degree；
such licenses。 In a narrative poem； the first proposition or
design confines the author to one subject； and any
digressions of this nature would； at first view； be rejected
as absurd and monstrous。 Neither B/OCCACE； L/A F/ONTAINE；
nor any author of that kind； though pleasantry be their
chief object； have ever indulged them。
To return to the comparison of history and epic poetry；
we may conclude from the foregoing reasonings that as a
certain unity is requisite in all productions； it cannot be
wanting to history more than to any other； that in history
the connection among the several events which unites them
into one body is the relation of cause and effect； the same
which takes place in epic poetry； and that； in the latter
composition； this connection is only required to be closer
and more sensible on account of the lively imagination and
strong passions which must be touched by the poet in his
narration。 the P/ELOPONNESIAN war is a proper subject for
history； the siege of A/THENS for an epic poem； and the
death of A/LCIBIADES for a tragedy。
As the difference； therefore； betwixt history and epic
poetry consists only in the degrees of connection which bind
together those several events of which their subject is
composed； it will be difficult； if not impossible； by words
to determine exactly the bounds which separate them from
each other。 That is a matter of taste more than of
reasoning； and perhaps this unity may often be discovered in
a subject where； at first view； and from an abstract
consideration； we should least expect to find it。
It is evident that H/OMER； in the course of his
narration； exceeds the first proposition of his subject； and
that the anger of A/CHILLES； which caused the death of
H/ECTOR； is not the same with that which produced so many
ills to the G/REEKS。 But the strong connection betwixt
these two movements； the quick transition from one to the
other； the contrast betwixt the effects of concord and
discord amongst the princes； and the natural curiosity we
have to see A/CHILLES in action after so long repose all
these causes carry on the reader； and produce a sufficient
unity in the subject。
It may be objected to M/ILTON that he has traced up
his causes to too great a distance； a