fame book of the Iliad, Sarpedon's fpeech to Glaucus; which contains the nobleft leffon of political wisdom, and the most enlivening motives to magnanimity. I fhall not tranflate it literally, but confine myself to the general fcope of the argument; and I fhall give it in profe, that it may not feem to derive any part of its dignity from the charm of poetical numbers. "Why, O Glaucus, do we re "ceive from our people in Lycia "the honours of fovereignty, "and fo liberal a provifion? Is it "not in the hope, that we are "to diftinguish ourfelves by our "virtue, as much as we are diftinguished by our rank? Let us act accordingly that, when "they fee us encountering the "6 greatest perils of war, they may fay, we deferve the "honours and the dignity which we poffefs. If indeed (conti. nues he) by declining danger we could fecure ourselves a"gainst old age and the grave, I "fhould neither fight my felf in "the front of the battle, nor ex"hort you to do fo. But fince "death is unavoidable, and may "affail us from fo many thousand quarters, let us advance, and "either gain renown by victory, or by our fall give glory to the "conqueror." The whole is excellent but the grandeur and generofity of the conclufion can never be too highly applauded. " " 5. Poetry is alfo fublime, when it defcribes in a lively manner the visible effects of any of thofe paffions that give elevation to the character. Such is that paffage, in the conclufion of the fame twelfth book of the Iliad, which paints the impetuofity and terrible appearance of Hector, ftorming the abound in examples. Yet in great frength, for example, there may be unwieldness, or awkwardness, or fome other contemptible quality, whereby the fublime is deftroyed. Polyphemus is a match for five hundred. Greeks; but he is not a grand object. We hate his barbarity, and defpife his folly, too much, to allow him a fingle grain of admiration. Ulyffes, who in the hands of Polypheme was nothing, is incomparably more fublime, when, in walking to his palace, difguifed like a beggar, he is infulted, and even kicked, by one of his own flaves, who was in the fervice of those rebels that were tempting his queen, plundering his houfehold, and alienating the affections of his people. Homer tells us, that the hero ftood firm, without being moved from his place by the ftroke; that he deliberated for a moment, whether he should at one blow fell the traitor to the earth; but that patience and prudential thoughts reftrained him. The brutal force of the Cyclops is not near so striking as this picture; which difplays bodily ftrength and magnanimity united. For what we despise we never admire; and therefore de fpicable greatnefs cannot be fublime. Homer and Virgil have, each of them, given a defcription of a K4 horfea horfe, which is very much, and juftly, celebrated. But they dwell rather upon the fwiftnefs and beauty of the animal, or on fuch of his paffions as have little or no dignity; and therefore their defcriptions, though moft elegant and harmonious, cannot properly be termed fublime. In the book of Job, we have the picture of a war-horfe in the most magnificent ftyle. The infpired poet expatiates upon the nobler qualities of that animal, his ftrength, impetuofity, and contempt of danger: and several of the words made use of, being figurative, and in their proper meaning expreffive of human emotions, convey uncommon vivacity and elevation to the whole paffage. "Haft thou given the horse ftrength? Haft thou clothed his neck with thunder "-alluding, perhaps, either to the noife of cavalry advancing; or to their speed, which the poet infinuates may be compared to that of lightning. "Canft thou make him afraid as a grafhopper the glory of his noftrils is terrible ;"—that is, the breath coming from his noftrils, which appear red with diftenfion, make him look as if fire and smoke were iffuing from them; an idea, from the fword. The quiver rattieth against him, the glittering fpear and the fhield. He fwalloweth the ground with fierceness and rage," which probably fignifies, according to fome tranflations," he looks as if he would fwallow the ground*; neither be. lieveth he that it is the found of the trumpet. He faith among the trumpets, ha, ha;" defpifes their alarm as much as we do that of a threatening which only provokes our laughter: " and he smelleth the battle afar off, the thunder of the captains, and the fhouting." Befides the grandeur of the animal, as here painted, the fublimity of the paffage is heightened exceed. ingly by the landfcape; which presents to our view an army in order of battle, and makes us think we hear the crashing of armour, and the fhouts of encountering multitudes." On Tafte, from Lectures on Rhe toric and Belles Lettres, by Hugh Blair, D. D. one of the Minifters of the High Church, and Profeffor of Rhetoric and Belles Lettres in the University of Edin. burgh. which Virgil has finely expreffed "T in that line, Collectumque premens volvit fub naribus ignem. "He paweth in the valley, and rejoiceth in his ftrength; he goeth on to meet the armed men. He mocketh at fear, and is not affrighted, neither turneth he back HE characters of Tafte when brought to its most perfect ftate are all reducible to two, Delicacy and Correctness. Delicacy of Tafte refpects principally the perfection of that na❤ tural fenfibility on which Taste is founded. It implies those finer organs or powers which enable us to difcover beauties that lie hid In a very ingenious criticism on this paffarge in the Guardian, these words are differently understood. from from a vulgar eye. One may have ftrong fenfibility, and yet be deficient in delicate taste. He may be deeply impreffed by fich beauties as he perceives; but he perceives only what is in fome degree coarfe, what is bold and palFable; while chatter and fimpler ornaments efcape his notice. In this ftate Tatte generally exifts among rude and unrefined nations. But a perfon of delicate Tafte both feels ftrongly, and feels accurately. He fees diftinctions and differences where others fee none; the most latent beauty does not escape him, and he is fenfible of the fmalleft blemish. Delicacy of Tafte is judged of by the fame marks that we ufe in judgin of the delicacy of an external sense. As the goodness of the palate is not tried by strong flavours, but by a mixture of ingredients, where, notwithstanding the confufion, we remain fenfible of each; in like manner delicacy of internal Tate appears, by a quick and lively fenfibility to its finest, moft compounded, or moft latent objects. Correctness of Tafte refpects chiefly the improvement which that faculty receives through its connexion with the understanding. A man of correct Tafte is one who is never impofed on by counterfeit beauties; who carries always in his mind that ftandard of good fenfe which he employs in judging of every thing. He estimates with propriety the comparative merit of the several beauties which he meets with in any work of genius refers them to their proper claffes; affigns the principles, as far as they can be traced, whence their power of pleafing us flows; and is pleafed himself precifely in that degree in which he ought, and no more. Dea It is true that thefe two quali ties of Tafte, Delicacy, and Cor rectness, mutually imply each other. No Tafte can be exquifirely delicate without being correct; nor can be thoroughly correct without being delicate. But ftill a predominancy of one or other quality in the mixture is often vifible. The power of Delicacy is chiefly feen in difcerning the true merit of a work; the power of Correctnefs, in rejecting falfe pretenfions to merit. licacy leans more to feeling; Correctnefs more to reafon and judgment. The former is more the gift of nature; the latter, more the product of culture and art. Among the antient critics, Longinus poffeffed moft Delicacy; Ariftotle, moft Correctnefs. Among the moderns, Mr. Addifon is a high example of delicate Tafte; Dean Swift, had he writ ten on the fubject of criticism, would perhaps have afforded the example of a correct one. Having viewed Taste in its most improved and perfect ftate, I come next to confider its deviations from that ftate, the fluctuations and changes to which it is liable; and to enquire whether, in the midft of thefe, there be any means of diftinguishing a true from a corrupted Tafte. This brings us to the most difficult part of our tak. For it must be acknow ledged, that no principle of the human mind is, in its operations, more fluctuating and capricious than Tafte. Its variations have been fo great and frequent, as to create a fufpicion with fome, of its being merely arbitrary; grounded on no foundation, afcertainable by no ftandard, but wholly dependent on changing fancy; the Fonfequence of which would be, that all ftudies or regular enquiries concerning the objects of Tafte were vain. In architecture, the Grecian models were Jong efte med the melt perfect. In fucceeding ages, the Gothic architecture alone prevailed, and afterwards the Grecian Tafte revived in all its vigour, and engroffed the public admiration. In eloquence and poetry, the Afiatics at no time relished any thing but what was full of ornament, and fplendid in a degree that we would denominate gaudy; whilft the Greeks admired only chafte and fimple beauties, and defpifed the Afiatic oftentation. In our own, country, how many writings that were greatly extolled two or three centuries ago, are now fallen into entire, difrepute and oblivion? Without going back to remote inftances, how very different is the tate of poetry which prevails in Great Britain now, from what prevailed there no longer ago than the reign of king Charles II. which the authors too of that time deemed an Auguftan age when nothing was in vogue but an affected brilliancy of wit; when the fimple majefty of Milton was overlooked, and Paradife Loft almoft entirely unknown; when Cowley's laboured and unnatural conceits were admired as the very quinteffence of genius; Waller's gay fprightlinefs was mistaken for the tender fpirit of Love poetry; and fuch writers as Suckling and Etheridge were held in eftecm for dramatic compofition? The question is, what conclu. fion are we to form from fuch in. ftances as these? Is there any thing that can be called a ftandard of Tafte, by appealing to which we may distinguish between a good and a bad Tatte? Or, is there in truth no fuch diftinction; and are we to hold that, according to the proverb, there is no difputing of Tates; but that whatever pleafes is right, for that reason that it does pleafe? This is the queftion, and a very nice and fubtile one it is, which we are now to discuss. I begin by obferving, that if there be no fuch thing as any ftandard of Tafte, this confe quence muft immediately follow, that all Taftes are equally good; a pofition, which though it may pafs unnoticed in flight matters, and when we fpeak of the leller differences among the Taftes of men, yet when we apply it to the extremes, its abfurdity presently becomes glaring. For is there any one who will feriously maintain that the Tafte of a Hottentot or a Laplander is as delicate and as correct as that of a Longinus or an Addison? or, that he can be charged with no defect or incapacity who thinks a common news-writer as excellent an hiftorian as Tacitus? As it would be held downright extravagance to talk in this manner, we are led unavoidably to this conclufion, that there is fome foundation for the preference of one man's Tafte to that of another; or, that there is a good and a bad, a right and a wrong in Tafte, as in other things. But to prevent mistakes on this fubject, it is necessary to obferve next, that the diversity of Taftes which prevails among mankind, does not in every cafe infer corruption of Tafte, or oblige us to feek for fome ftandard in order to determine who are in the right. The Taftes of men may dier very confiderably as to their object, and yet none of them be wrong. One man relishes poetry moft; another takes pleasure in nothing but hiftory. One prefers comedy; another, tragedy. One admires the fimple; another the ornamental ftyle. The young are amufed with gay and (prightly compofitions. The elderly are more entertained with thofe of a longer diverfity, but direct oppo. graver caft. Some nations delight But then, to explain this matter thoroughly, I muft obferve farther, that this admiffible diverfity of Taftes can only have place where the objects of Tafte are different. Where it is with respect to the fame object that men difagree, when one condemns that as ugly, which another admires as highly beautiful; then it is no What that ftandard is, to which, are obliged to have recourse, re- and |