[ 22 ] 



If further proof were neceflary, I would only defirc any man 

 to attempt fome other form of expreffion for that divine paflage 

 of Homer refpeding Pluto's terror, 5' 6« g^ova cchro nai layj. He 

 vvill then perhaps be fenfible that there is a fecret virtue and 

 powerful charm in language and arrangement. 



The ufe of figures is perhaps of more importance than either 

 of the precepts which we have been juft confidering, for they 

 afFed rather the matter than the form of compofition. 



Nothing feems more finely calculated to produce fublime 

 efFeds than the invention and application of bold and ftriking 

 figures. Dr. Blair tells us that " it is not by hunting after 

 " tropes and figures we can exped to produce the fublirrae." 

 The laboured and afFeded ufe of fuch ornaments I admit to be 

 improper ; but then we fhould confider that figurative language 

 is the natural language of the paffions, and of courfe might be 

 neceffarily required and happily employed in cafes where the 

 pathetic rifes into the fublime. And for this caufe the mind 

 fhould be flored with a copious variety of images and figures ; 

 for when the imagination or the pafllons are once heated, they 

 will naturally ftrike out fuch as are moft appropriate to the fub- 

 jed. Longinus, I think, demonftrates that figures and fublimity 

 impart a reciprocal aid ; or in other words, the fublime matter 

 is heightened by the invention of bold figures, and figures in 

 their turn acquire force and grandeur from their connedion 

 with the fublime. I am the more furprized at Dr. Blair's re- 

 ceding this fource, as Longinus has exemplified its noble ef- 

 feds in more inftances than one. For this purpofe he has in- 

 troduced 



