All For Love: Epistle Dedicatory Summary & Analysis

John Dryden dedicates All for Love to an aristocratic patron: Thomas Osborne, Earl of Danby. Dryden claims that poets are less noble than politicians and public figures, since they can only write about “worthy actions,” whereas others can actually do them. But he also argues that poets are important to a commonwealth because they chronicle the great deeds and history of their country. Kings and aristocrats should patronize poets, he suggests, because poets will preserve their reputation for future generations.

Dryden praises Osborne—who served as Lord High Treasurer to King Charles II—for his good financial stewardship and leadership in the face of accusations of bribery. He points out that a king can often be judged by his choice of ministers, and he calls Osborne the perfect “copy” and “emanation” of King Charles’s goodness.

This praise of Osborne’s virtues leads Dryden to a larger consideration of the merits of the English constitutional monarchy, which Dryden calls the best form of government in the world. He argues that the English have significant freedoms while still retaining   the benefit of a monarchy—a monarchy that is “without tyranny.” By contrast, Dryden calls a republic a “specious [i.e. false] name” that claims to offer liberty to its citizens but isn’t actually free. He argues that a monarchy always has some checks on its power, while in a republic the elected representatives are free to oppress the very people they are supposed to be representing.

Furthermore, Dryden argues that a constitutional monarchy is the ideal form of government for England, an island kingdom which he thinks is more fit for “commerce and defense” than invading and conquering other countries. It is difficult to gather taxes to support war overseas, so large overseas empires tend to require absolute government in order to force their citizens to pay taxes and press them into military service. But people are generally willing to pay taxes to support defense, so England’s non-tyrannical form of monarchy is the best fit for its lack of imperial ambitions.

For all these benefits of England’s current form of government, however, Dryden admits that there are some people who want a change. He thinks this is wrong, since English citizens are already as free as they can be—any additional freedom would just be “license,” or a pushing of boundaries beyond what is acceptable. He also dismisses the argument that England needs more religious freedom, pointing out that no one in the country is actively persecuted for their beliefs. He thinks that all attempts at “reform” are dangerous, since any rebellion—even if it just claims to want to reform rather than take down the government—strikes at “the root of power, which is obedience.”

Dryden explains that he has addressed these thoughts on English politics to Osborne because the earl has a long history of loyalty to the English monarchy (Osborne’s father fought for Charles II’s father, Charles I, during the English Civil War). Dryden praises Osborne for sacrificing his private life and comfort in the name of public service. He apologizes for writing such a long dedication that doesn’t even mention the poem he has written, but ends by admitting that he doesn’t think Osborne will have the time to read it, given his busy schedule of public duties.