The Defence of Poesie.
many Philosophers vnworthie to liue. Certaine Poets, as Simonides, and Pindarus, had so preuailed with Hiero the first, that of a Tyrant they made him a iust King: where Plato could do so little with Dionisius, that he himselfe of a Philosopher, was made a slaue. But who should do thus, I confesse should requite the obiections made against Poets, with like cauillations against Philosophers: as likewise one should do, that should bid one read Phaedrus or Simposium in Plato, or the discourse of loue in Plutarch, and see whether any Poet do authorise abhominable filthinesse as they doo. Againe, a man might aske, out of what Common-wealth Plato doth banish them, in sooth, thence where he himselfe alloweth communitie of women. So as belike this banishment grew not for effeminate wantonnesse, since little should Poetical Sonnets be hurtful, when a man might haue what woman he listed. But I honor Philosophicall instructions, and blesse the wits which bred them: so as they be not abused, which is likewise stretched to Poetrie. S. Paul himselfe sets a watch-word vppon Philosophie, indeed vppon the abuse. So doth Plato vppon the abuse, not vpon Poetrie. Plato found fault that the Poettes of his time, filled the worlde with wrng opinions of the Gods, making light tales of that vnspotted essence; and therfore wold not haue the youth depraued with such opinions: heerein may much be said; let this suffice. The Poets did not induce such opinions, but did imitate those opinions alreadie induced. For all the Greeke stories can well testifie, that the verie religiō of that time, stood vpon many, and many fashioned Gods: Not taught
