interest my self in that quarrel of the _Criticks_, whether we have
all _Aristotles_ books of Poetry or no; this is a considerable
difficulty I confess, for _Laertius_ who accurately weighs this
matter, says that he wrote two books of _Poetry_, the one lost, and
the other we have, tho _Mutinensis_ is of an other mind: but to end
this dispute, I must agree with _Vossius_, who says the Philosopher
comprehended these Species not expressly mentioned, under a higher and
more noble head: and that therefore _Pastoral_ was contain'd in
_Epick_. for these are his own words, _besides there are Epicks of an
inferior rank, such as the Writers of Bucolicks_. _Sincerus_, as
_Minturnus_ quotes him, is of the same mind, for thus he delivers his
opinion concerning _Epick Verse_: _The matters about which these
numbers may be employed is various; either mean and low, as in
Pastorals, great and lofty, as when {19} the Subject is Divine Things,
or Heroick Actions, or of a middle rank, as when we use them to
deliver precepts in:_ And this likewise he signifys before, where he
sets down three sorts of _Epicks_: _one of which, says he, is divine,
and the most excellent by much in all Poetry_; the _other the lowest
but most pure, in which Theocritus excelled, which indeed shews
nothing of Poetry beside the bare numbers_: These points being thus
settled, the remaining difficultys will be more easily dispatched.

For as in _Dramatick_ Poetry the Dignity and meanness of the
_Persons_ represented make two different _Species of imitation_ the
one _Tragick_, which agrees to none but great and Illustrious persons,
the other _Comick_, which suits with common and gentile humors: so in
_Epick_ too, there may be reckoned two sorts of _Imitation_, one of
which belongs to _Heroes_, and that makes the _Heroick_; the other to
_Rusticks_ and _Sheapards_ and that constitutes the _Pastoral_, now as
a _Picture_ imitates the Features of the face, so _Poetry_ doth