a writer of taste will avoid. For the fame reason, an epithet is unfuitable, which at prefent is not applicable to the subject, however applicable it may be afterward.

r

Submerfafque obrue puppes.

Eneid. i. 73.

And mighty ruins fall.

- Iliad v. 411.

Impious fons their mangled fathers wound.

Another rule regards this figure, That the property of one object ought not to be bestowed upon another with which it is in

How dare thy joints forget

To pay their awful duty to our prefence.

Richard II. act 3. fc. 6.

The connection betwixt an awful fuperior and his fubmiffive dependent is fo intimate, that an attribute may readily be transferred from the one to the other. But awfulness cannot be fo transferred, because it is inconfiftent with fubmiffion.

A Metaphor differs from a fimile, in

form only, not in fubftance. In a fi mile the two different fubjects are kept diftinct in the expreffion, as well as in the thought in a metaphor, the two sub jects are kept diftinct in thought only, not in expreffion. A hero refembles a lion, and upon that refemblance many fimiles have been made by Homer and other poets. But instead of refembling a lion, let us take the aid of the imagination, and feign or figure the hero to be a lion. By this variation the fimile is converted into a metaphor which is carried on by defcribing all the qualities of a lion that refemble thofe of the hero. The fundamental pleasure here, that of refemblance, belongs to thought as diftinguished from expreffion. There is an additional pleasure which arifes from the expreffion.

The

་

The poet, by figuring his hero to be a lion, goes on to defcribe the lion in appearance, but in reality the hero; and his description is peculiarly beautiful, by expreffing the virtues and qualities of the hero in new terms, which, properly fpeaking, belong hot to him, but to a different being. This will better be understood by examples. A family connected with a common parent, refembles a tree, the trunk and branches of which are connected with a common root. But let us fuppofe, that a family is figured not barely to be like a tree, but to be a tree, and then the fimile will be converted into a metaphor, in the following manner.

Edward's fev'n fons, whereof thyfelf art one,
Were fev'n fair branches, fpringing from one root:
Some of thefe branches by the deft'nies cut:
But Thomas, my dear Lord, my life, my Glo'-

fter,

One flourishing branch of his most royal root,
Is hack'd down, and his fummer-leaves all faded,
By Envy's hand and Murder's bloody axe.

Richard II. a

1. fc. 3.

Figuring

Figuring human life to be a voyage at fea :

There is a tide in the affairs of men,

Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life

Is bound in fhallows and in miferies.

On fuch a full fea are we now afloat;

And we must take the current when it ferves,
Or lofe our ventures.

Julius Cafar, alt 4. Sc. 5.

Figuring glory and honour to be a garland

of fresh flowers:

* Hotspur!

Would to heav'n,

Thy name in arms were now as great as mine!

Pr. Henry. I'll make it greater, ere I part from {thee;

And all the budding honours on thy creft

I'll crop, to make a garland for my head.

First Part Henry IV. alt 5. Sc. 9.

Figuring a man who hath acquired great reputation and honour to be a tree full of fruit:

di Oh, boys, this ftory The world may read in me: my body's mark'd With Roman fwords; and my report was once

First with the beft of note

Cymbeline lov'd me; And when a foldier was the theme, my name

Was not far off: then was I as a tree,

Whofe boughs did bend with fruit. But in one night,

A ftorm or robbery, call it what you will,

Shook down my mellow hangings, nay my leaves And left me bare to weather.

Cymbeline, att 3. fc. 3.

I am aware that the term metaphor has been used in a more extenfive fenfe than I give it; but I thought it of confequence, in matters of fome intricacy, to feparate things that differ from each other, and to confine words within their moft proper fenfe. An allegory differs from a metaphor; and what I would chufe to call a figure of speech, differs from both. I fhall proceed to explain thefe differences. A metaphor is defined a bove to be an operation of the imagination, figuring one thing to be another. An allegory requires no operation of the imagina-. tion, nor is one thing figured to be another; it confifts in chufing a fubject having properties or circumstances refembling thofe of

the