power of Richardfon alone to teach us at once efteem and deteftation, to make virtuous refentment overpower all the benevolence which wit, and elegance, and courage, naturally excite; and to lofe at laft the hero in the villain.

The fifth act is not equal to the former; the events of the drama are exhaufted, and little remains but to talk of what is past. It has been obferved, that the title of the play does not fuffi-ciently correfpond with the behaviour of Califta, who at laft fhews no evident figns of repentance, but may be reafonably fufpected of feeling pain from detection rather than from guilt, and expreffes more fhame than forrow, and more rage than fhame.

His next (1706) was Ulyffes; which, with the common fate of mythological ftories, is now generally neglected. We have been too early acquainted with the poetical heroes to expect any pleasure from their revival; to fhew them as they have already been fhewn, is to disgust by repetition; to give them new quali ties or new adventures, is to offend by violating received notions.

The Royal Convert (1708) feems to have a better claim to longevity. The fable is drawn from an obfcure and barbarous age, to which fictions are moft cafily and properly adapted; for when objects are imperfectly feen, they eafily take forms from imagination. The scene lies among our ancestors in our own

country,

country, and therefore very easily catches Rhodogune is a perfonage

attention.

truly tragical, of high fpirit, and violent paffions, great with tempeftuous dignity, and wicked with a foul that would have been heroic if it had been virtuous. The motto feems to tell, that this play was not fuccefsful.

Rowe does not always remember what his characters require. In Tamerlane there is fome ridiculous mention of the God of Love; and Rhodogune, a favage Saxon, talks of Venus, and the eagle that bears the thunder of Jupiter.

This play discovers its own date, by a prediction of the Union, in imitation of Cranmer's prophetick promises to Henry the Eighth. The anticipated

bleffings

bleffings of union are not very naturally introduced, nor very happily expreffed.

He once (1706) tried to change his hand. He ventured on a comedy, and produced the Biter; with which, though it was unfavourably treated by the audience, he was himfelf delighted; for he is faid to have fat in the house, laughing with great vehemence, whenever he had in his own opinion produced a jeft. But finding that he and the publick had no fympathy of mirth, he tried at lighter fcenes no more.

After the Royal Convert (1714) appeared Jane Share, written, as its author profeffes, in imitation of Shakespeare's file. In what he thought himself an imitator of Shakespeare it is not eafy to conceive.

The

The numbers, the diction, the fentiments, and the conduct, every thing in which imitation can confift, are remote in the utmoft degree from the manner of Shakespeare, whose dramas it refembles only as it is an English ftory, and as fome of the perfons have their names in hiftory. This play, confifting chiefly of domeftick scenes and private distress, lays hold upon the heart. The wife is forgiven becaufe fhe repents, and the husband is honoured because he forgives. This therefore is one of those pieces which we ftill welcome on the flage.

His laft tragedy (1715) was Lady Jane Grey. This fubject had been chofen by Mr. Smith, whofe papers were put into Rowe's

4