r '9 ] 



The principles hitherto bid down may ferve in fome degree 

 to Ihew the connedion between the pathetic and fublime, 

 •fo far as the defcription and expreffion of the feveral paffions 

 are concerned. Another copious fource of the fuWime may be 

 laid open in the government and controul of the paffions, 

 which may poffibly be the fubjed of a future effay. 



I WAS induced to give attention to the fubjed before us 

 from having read fome ftrittures made upon Longinus by Dr. 

 Blair, in my opinion without fufficient foundation. To vindicate 

 the great critic was my firft defign ; but yet finding no principles 

 to which we might refort for determining the connedion in any 

 cafe whatfoever between the pathetic and fublime, I have offered 

 you fuch refledions on this matter as arofe in my own mind. 

 Having done fo, I will now briefly examine thofe flridures by 

 Dr. Blair. 



He afferts that Longinus has made a falfe divifion of his 

 fubjed ; for that of the five fources of the fublime which he 

 has laid open, the three laft have perhaps lefs relation to the 

 fublime than to any other fpecies of good writing, becaufe it 

 requires lefs the affiftance of ornament ; and he calls this plan 

 rather a treatife of rhetoric than of the fublime. This feems to 

 me too fummary a way of deciding upon the merit of a work 

 which has received the fandion of learning and tafle in all ages. 

 Such a criticifm ought to have been fupported by fome argu- 

 ment, and not advanced in its prefent nndigefted form. To 

 me it appears materially defedive, both becaufe Dr. Blair has 

 mifconceived, or at leaft improperly expreffed, the great author's 

 [C 2] meaning; 



