For as well poets as poesie are despised, and the name become, of honourable infamous, subject to scorn and derision, and rather a reproach than a praise to any that useth it; for commonly whoso is studious in the Art or shows himself excellent in it, they call him in disdain a fantastical; and a light-headed or fantastical man (by conversion) they call a Poet. And this proceeds through the barbarous ignorance of the time, and pride of many gentlemen, and others, whose gross heads not being brought up or acquainted with any excellent art, nor able to contrive, or in manner conceive any matter of subtility in any business or science, they do deride and scorn it in all others as superfluous knowledges and vain sciences, and whatsoever device be of rare invention they term it fantastical, construing it to the worst side, and among men such as be modest and grave, and of little conversation, nor delighted in the busy life and vain ridiculous actions of the popular, they call him in scorn a philosopher or poet, as much as to say as a fantastical man, very injuriously (God wot) and to the manifestation of their own ignorance, not making difference betwixt terms…
So it seems not altogether the scorn and ordinary disgrace offered unto poets at these days is cause why few gentlemen do delight in the Art, but for that liberality is come to sail in Princes, who for their largesse were wont to be accompted the only patrons of learning and first founders of all excellent artificers. Besides it is not perceived that Princes themselves do take any pleasure in this science, by whose example the subject is commonly led, and allured to all delights and exercises be they good or bad...
And peradventure in this iron and malicious age of ours, Princes are less delighted in it, being over earnestly bent and affected to the affaires of empire and ambition, whereby they are as it were enforced to endeavour themselves to arms and practices of hostility, or to intend to the right policing of their states, and have not one hour to bestow upon any other civil or delectable art of natural or moral doctrine, nor scarce any leisure to think one good thought in perfect and godly contemplation, whereby their troubled minds might be moderated and brought to tranquillity. So as, it is hard to find in these days of noblemen or gentlemen any good mathematician, or excellent musician, or notable philosopher, or else a cunning poet, because we find few great Princes much delighted in the same studies.
Now also of such among the nobility or gentry as be very well seen in many laudable sciences, and especially in making or poesie, it is come to pass that they have no courage to write and, if they have, yet are they loath to be known of their skill. So as I know very many notable gentlemen in the Court that have written commendably and suppressed it again, or else suffered it to be published without their own names to it, as if it were a discredit for a gentleman to seem learned and to show himself amorous of any good art.
I have modernised the spelling where necessary for clarity.
From as early as 1590 authorship of the book was ascribed to either one or other of two brothers, George Puttenham (c.1529-90) or Richard Puttenham (c.1520-1601). Nowadays it is usually the former who is thought to have been the author.