m 



quainted. And if in such a copious language as that pf 

 our's, there be ^&vi words that are not used in a variety of 

 significations, what a complicated heap of metaphor must 

 that tongue be, which does not consist of the twentieth part 

 of our vocabulary ? Besides, though the language abound 

 thus in metaphor, it by no means follows that it is, therefore, 

 more poetical or sublime; the style is generally very uneq.ual; 

 if one passage is somewhat beyond the level of ordinary poe- 

 try among us, the next is as much below it. We know that in 

 natural objects, a country abounding in sudden declivities 

 and steep ascents, strikes the eye as much mOre picturesque;' 

 and perhaps more elevated, than a tra-ct of as great height in 

 reality, but less diversified in it's appearance. 



If this be so in the primary objects of the imagination, 

 (and I believe every one accustomed to the observation of 

 nature will assent to it) it may, by an easy, and apparently 

 just analogy, be transferred to the secondary. As accuracy 

 of proportion, therefore, diminishes the visible height of an 

 object, so a composition, the s^'mmetry of whose parts is re-^' 

 gulated by an accurate taste, will not impress upon the ima- 

 gination at first view, those ideas of sublimity and boldness, 

 that are so powerfully excited by the perusal of the wild pro- 

 ductions of untutored ftincy. The second opinion above 

 mentioned, that the early poems of men possessed of real' 

 poetical talent, abound in a gay luxuriancy of thought, un- 

 equalled in their n>aturer works^ is 'alsO very questionable. 

 On the contrary, I believe it will be found, by examining the 



