fame book of the Iliad, Sarpedon's fpeech to Glaucus; which contains the nobleft leffon of political wifdom, 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 ourselves by our virtue, as much as we are diftinguished by our rank? Let us act accordingly: that, when they fee us encountering the "greateft perils of war, they "" may fay, we deferve the "honours and the dignity which "we poffefs. If indeed (conti " nues he) by declining danger 66 we could fecure ourselves a"gainst old age and the grave, I fhould neither fight myfelf 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 vifible 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 terri ble appearance of Hector, ftorming the intrenchments, and purfuing the enemy to their fhips. Extraordinary efforts of magnanimity, valour, or any other virtue, and extraordinary exertions of ftrength or power, are grand objects, and give fublimity to thofe pictures or poems, in which they are well reprefented. All the great poets abound in examples. Yet in great strength, for example, there may be unwieldness, or awkwardness, or fome other contemptible quality, whereby the fublime is destroyed. Polyphe. mus 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 fhould 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 fo ftriking as this picture; which displays bodily ftrength and magnanimity united. For what we defpife we never admire; and therefore defpicable greatnefs cannot be fublime. Homer and Virgil have, each of them, given a defcription of a K 4 horfe, horfe, which is very much, and justly, 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 most 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 feveral of the words made ufe of, being figurative, and in their proper meaning expreffive of human emotions, convey uncommon vivacity and elevation to the whole paffage. from the fword. The quiver rattleth 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 believeth 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 fmelleth 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 exceedingly by the landfcape; which prefents to our view an army in order of battle, and makes us think we hear the crashing of armour, and the fhouts of encoun Haft thou given the horfe ftrength? Hat thou clothed his neck with thunder?"-alluding, perhaps, either to the noife of catering multitudes." valry 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 fmoke were iffuing from them; an idea, which Virgil has finely expreffed in that line, On Tate, from Lectures on Rhe Collecumque 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 toric and Belles Lettres, by Hugh Blair, D. D. one of the Minifiers of the High Church, and Profeffor of Rhetoric and Belles Lettres in the Univerfity of Edinburgh. T HE characters of Tafte when brought to its most perfect state are all reducible to two, Delicacy and Correctnefs. Delicacy of Tafte refpects prin cipally the perfection of that natural fenfibility on which Tafte is founded. It implies thofe finer organs or powers which enable us to difcover beauties that lie hid In a very ingenious criticism on this paffage in the Guardian, these words are differently underflood. from from a vulgar eye. One may have ftrong fenfibility, and yet be deficient in delicate Tafte. He may be deeply impreffed by fuch beauties as he perceives; but he perceives only what is in fome degree coarfe, what is bold and palpable; while chafter and fimpler ornaments escape his notice. In this ftate Tafte generally exifts among rude and unrefined na tions. But a perfon of delicate Tafte both feels ftrongly, and feels accurately. He fees diftinctions and differences where others fee none; the moft latent beauty does not efcape him, and he is fenfible of the smallest blemish. Delicacy of Tafte is judged of by the fame marks that we ufe in judging of the delicacy of an external fenfe. As the goodness of the palate is not tried by ftrong flavours, but by a mixture of ingredients, where, notwithstanding the confufion, we remain fenfible of each; in like manner delicacy of internal Tafte appears, by a quick and lively fenfibility to its fineft, moft compounded, or moft latent objects. Correctnefs 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 imposed on by counterfeit beauties; who carries always in his mind that standard of good fenfe which he employs in judging of every thing. He estimates with propriety the comparative merit of the feveral 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. It is true that these two qualities of Tafte, Delicacy and Correctnefs, mutually imply each other. No Tafte can be exquifitely 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 Correctness, in rejecting falfe pretenfions to merit. Delicacy 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 Correctness. Among the moderns, Mr. Addifon is a high example of delicate Tafte; Dean Swift, had he written on the fubject of criticifm, would perhaps have afforded the example of a correct one. Having viewed Tafte in its moft 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 task. For it must be acknowledged, 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, ascertainable by no ftandard, but wholly dependent on changing fancy; the confequence of which would be, that all ftudies or regular enquiries concerning the objects of Tafte were vain. In architecture, the Grecian models were long esteemed the most perfect. In fucceeding ages, the Gothic architecture alone prevailed, and afterwards the Grecian Taste 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 taste 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 efteem for dramatic compofition? The question is, what conclufion we are to form from such inftances, as thefe? Is there any thing that can be called a standard of Tafte, by appealing to which we may diftinguish between a good and a bad Tafte? Or, is there in truth no fuch distinction; and are we to hold that, according to the proverb, there is no difputing of Taftes; but that whatever pleases is right, for that reason that it does pleafe? This is the question, and a very nice and fubtile one it is, which we are now to difcufs. I begin by obferving, that if there be no fuch thing as any ftandard of Tafte, this confequence muft immediately follow, that all Taftes are equally good; a pofition, which though it may pafs unnoticed in flight matters, and when we speak of the leffer differences among the Taftes of men, yet when we apply it to the extremes, its abfurdity prefently becomes glaring. For is there any one who will seriously maintain that the Taste 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 hif torian 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 neceffary to obferve next, that the diverfity of Taftes which 3 which prevails among mankind, does not in every cafe infer corruption of Tate, or oblige us to feek for fome ftandard in order to determine who are in the right. The Taftes of men may differ very confiderably as to their object, and yet none of them be wrong. One man relishes poetry most; another takes pleafure in nothing but history. One prefers comedy; another, tragedy. One admires the fimple; another, the ornamental ftyle. The young are amufed with gay and fprightly compofitions. The elderly are more entertained with thofe of a graver caft. Some nations delight in bold pictures of manners, and ftrong reprefentations of paffion. Others incline to more correct and regular elegance both in defcrip. tion and fentiment, Though all differ, yet all pitch upon fome one beauty which peculiarly fuits their turn of mind; and therefore no one has a title to condemn the reft, It is not in matters of Tafte, as in queftions of mere reafon, where there is but one conclufion that can be true, and all the reft are erroneous. Truth, which is the object of reafon, is one; beauty, which is the object of Tafte, is manifold. Tafte therefore admits of latitude and diverfity of objects, in fufficient confiftency with goodness or juftness of Tafte. 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 refpect to the fame object that men difagree, when one condemns that as ugly, which another admires as highly beautiful; then it is no longer diverfity, but direct oppofition of Tafte that takes place; and therefore one must be in the right, and another in the wrong, unless that abfurd paradox were allowed to hold, that all Taftes are equally good and true., One man prefers Virgil to Homer, Suppofe that I, on the other hand, admire Homer more than Virgil, I have as yet no reason to say that our Taftes are contradictory. The other perfon is moft ftruck with the elegance and tenderness which are the characteristics of Virgil; I, with the fimplicity and fire of Homer, As long as neither of us deny that both Homer and Virgil have great beauties, our dif ference falls within the compafs of that diverfity of Taftes, which I have fhewed to be natural and allowable. But if the other man fhall affert that Homer has no beauties whatever; that he holds. him to be a dull and fpiritlefs writer, and that he would as foon perufe any old legend of knighterrantry as the Iliad; then I exclaim, that my antagonist either is void of all Tafte, or that his Tafte is corrupted in a miserable degree; and I appeal to whatever I think the ftandard of Tafte, to fhew him that he is in the wrong. What that ftandard is, to which, in fuch oppofition of Taftes, we are obliged to have recourse, remains to be traced. A standard properly fignifies, that which is of fuch undoubted authority as to be the teft of other things of the fame kind. Thus a ftandard weight or measure, is that which is appointed by law to regulate all other meafures and weights. Thus the court is faid to be the ftandard of good breeding and |