Rising above the classical approach to criticism, Dr. Johnson also developed and practised historical approach to criticism. This does not in anyway mean that Dr. Johnson over ruled the classical principles. It only means that he added historical approach wherever this led to the better evaluation of a literary work. He holds that every literary work is conditioned by the historical background and the author's age and environment. No literary work can be correctly evaluated without taking into consideration "the genius of the age and nation in which the author lived".
Dr. Johnson says, "To judge rightly of an author, we must transport ourselves to his time, and examine what were the wants of his contemporaries, and what were his means of supplying them." What may be essential at one time may become superfluous at another time. The author's biographical conditions, his opportunities and limitations are essential to consider in order to form a correct estimate of his performance. In other words, the historical estimate is an important factor in the real estimate of an author. Without taking into consideration the socio-religious conditions of fourteenth century England, our evaluation of Chaucer, as a writer, would be grossly wrong. In the same way we cannot correctly evaluate the literature of the Restoration Age without placing it in the age of Charles II and the morals he brought in from France. While evaluating Milton, we must know his handicaps, his blindness, his opposition on religious and political grounds and how he overcomes them simply by his genius. Then only we would know his real greatness as a poet.
