attempt a fingle paper was no terrifying labour, many pieces were offered, and many were received.

Addison had enough of the zeal of party; but Steele had at that time almoft nothing elfe. The Spectator, in one of the firft papers, fhewed the political tenets of its authors; but a resolution was foon taken, of courting general approbation by general topicks, and fubjects on which faction had produced. no diverfity of fentiments; such as literature, morality, and familiar life. To this practice they adhered with few deviations. The ardour of Steele once broke out in praife of Marlborough; and when Dr. Fleetwood prefixed to fome fermons a preface, overflowing with whiggifh opinions, that it might be read by the Queen*, it was reprinted in the Spectator.

To teach the minuter decencies and inferior duties, to regulate the practice of daily converfation, to correct those depravities, which are rather ridiculous than criminal, and remove thofe grievances which, if they produce no lafting calamities, imprefs hourly vexation, was first attempted by Cafa in his book of Manners, and Caftiglione in his Courtier; two books yet celebrated in Italy for purity and elegance, and which, if they are now lefs read, are neglected only because they have effected that reformation which their authors intended, and their precepts now are no longer wanted. Their usefulness to the age in which they were written is fufficiently attefted by

* This particular number of the Spectator, it is faid, was not published till twelve o'clock, that it might come out precisely at the hour of her Majefty's breakfast, and that no time might be left for deliberating about ferving it up with that meal, as ufual. See the edition of the TATLER with notes, vol. VI, No. 271, note. P. 452, &c. N.

the

the translations which almoft all the nations of Europe were in hafte to obtain.

This fpecies of inftruction was continued, and perhaps advanced by the French; anong whom La Bruyere's Manners of the Age, though, as Boileau remarked, it is written without connection, certainly deferves praise, for livelinefs of defcription, and juftnefs of obfervation.

Before the Tatler and Spectator, if the writers for the theatre are excepted, England had no masters of common life. No writers had yet undertaken to reform either the favagenefs of neglect, or the impertinence of civility; to fhew when to fpeak, or to be filent; how to refufe, or how to comply. We had many books to teach us our more important duties, and to settle opinions in philosophy or politicks; but an Arbiter Elegantiarum, a judge of propriety, was yet wanting, who fhould furvey the track of daily conversation, and free it from thorns and prickles, which tease the paffer, though they do not wound him.

For this purpose nothing is fo proper as the frequent publication of fhort papers, which we read not as ftudy but amusement. If the subject be flight, the treatise is short. The bufy may find time, and the idle may find patience.

This mode of conveying cheap and eafy knowledge began among us in the Civil War *, when it was

* Newspapers appear to have had an earlier date than here affigned. Cleiveland, in his Character of a London Diurnal, fays, "The original finner of this kind was Dutch; Gallo-belgicus the "Protoplas, and the Modern Mercuries but Hans en kelders." Some intelligence given by Mercurius Gallo-belgicus is mentioned in Carew's Survey of Cornwall, p. 126, originally published in 1602. These vehicles of information are often mentioned in the plays of James and Charles the First. R.

much the intereft of either party to raise and fix the prejudices of the people. At that time appeared Mercurius Aulicus, Mercurius Rufticus, and Mercurius Civicus. It is faid, that when any title grew popular, it was ftolen by the antagonist, who by this ftratagem conveyed his notions to those who would not have received him had he not worn the appearance of a friend. The tumult of thofe unhappy days left fcarcely any man leifure to treasure up occafional compofitions; and fo much were they neglected, that a complete collection is no where to be found.

Thefe Mercuries were fucceeded by L'Eftrange's Obfervator; and that by Lefley's Rehearfal, and perhaps by others; but hitherto nothing had been conveyed to the people, in this commodious manner, but controversy relating to the Church or State; of which they taught many to talk, whom they could not teach to judge.

It has been fuggefted, that the Royal Society was inftituted foon after the Reftoration, to divert the attention of the people from publick difcontent. The Tatler and Spectator had the fame tendency; they were publifhed at a time when two parties, loud, reftlefs, and violent, each with plaufible declarations, and each perhaps without any diftinct termination of its views, were agitating the nation to minds heated with political conteft they fupplied cooler and more inoffenfive reflections; and it is said by Addison, in a fubfequent work, that they had a perceptible influence upon the converfation of that time, and taught the frolick and the gay to unite merriment with decency; an effect which they can never wholly lofe, while they continue to be among the first books by which both fexes are initiated in the elegances of knowledge. The

The Tatler and Spectator adjusted, like Casa, the unfettled practice of daily intercourse by propriety and politeness; and, like La Bruyere, exhibited the Characters and Manners of the Age. The perfonages introduced in thefe papers were not merely ideal; they were then known, and confpicuous in various ftations. Of the Tatler this is told by Steele in his laft paper; and of the Spectator by Budgell in the preface to Theophraftus, a book which Addifon has recommended, and which he was fufpected to have revised, if he did not write it. Of those portraits, which may be supposed to be fometimes embellished, and fometimes aggravated, the originals are now partly known, and partly forgotten.

But to say that they united the plans of two or three eminent writers, is to give them but a fmall part of their due praife; they fuperadded literature and criticism, and fometimes towered far above their predeceffors; and taught, with great juftness of argument and dignity of language, the most important duties and fublime truths.

All these topicks were happily varied with elegant fictions and refined allegories, and illuminated with different changes of style and felicities of invention.

It is recorded by Budgell, that of the characters feigned or exhibited in the Spectator, the favourite of Addison was Sir Roger de Coverley, of whom he had formed a very delicate and discriminate idea *, which he would not fuffer to be violated; and therefore, when Steele had fhewn him innocently picking

* The errors in this account are explained at confiderable length in the preface to the Spectator prefixed to the edition in the BRITISH ESSAYISTS. The original delineation of Sir Roger undoubtedly belongs to Steele. C.

up a girl in the Temple, and taking her to a tavern, he drew upon himself so much of his friend's indignation, that he was forced to appease him by a promife of forbearing Sir Roger for the time to come.

The reafon which induced Cervantes to bring his hero to the grave, para mi fola nacio Don Quixote, y yo para el, made Addifon declare, with undue vehemence of expreffion, that he would kill Sir Roger; being of opinion that they were born for one another, and that any other hand would do him wrong.

It may be doubted whether Addison ever filled up his original delineation. He defcribes his Knight as having his imagination fomewhat warped; but of this perverfion he has made very little ufe. The ir◄ regularities in Sir Roger's conduct feem not fo much the effects of a mind deviating from the beaten track of life, by the perpetual preffure of fome overwhelming idea, as of habitual rufticity, and that negligence which folitary grandeur naturally generates.

The variable weather of the mind, the flying vapours of incipient madness, which from time to time cloud reason, without eclipfing it, it requires fo much nicety to exhibit, that Addison feems to have been been deterred from profecuting his own defign.

To Sir Roger, who, as a country gentleman, appears to be a Tory, or, as it is gently expreffed, an adherent to the landed intereft, is opposed Sir Andrew Freeport, a new man, a wealthy merchant, zealous for the moneyed intereft, and a Whig. Of this contrariety of opinions, it is probable more confequences were at first intended than could be produced when the refolution was taken to exclude party from the paper. Sir Andrew does but little, and

that