1

tensive as a prospect of the ocean: but can it ever fill the mind with any thing fo great as the ocean itfelf? This is owing to feveral caufes; but it is owing to none more than this, that the ocean is an object of no fmall terrour. Indeed terrour is in all cafes whatsoever, either more openly or latently, the ruling principle of the fublime. Several languages bear a ftrong teftimony to the affinity of thefe ideas. They frequently use the fame word, to signify indifferently the modes of astonishment or admiration and thofe of terrour. @areos is in Greek, either fear or wonder ; devos is terrible or refpectable; andew, to reverence or to fear. Vereor in Latin, is what aidew is in Greek. The Romans ufed the verb stupeo, a term which strongly marks the ftate of an aftonifhed mind, to exprefs the effect either of fimple fear, or of astonishment; the word attonitus (thunder-ftruck) is equally expreffive of the alliance of thefe ideas; and do not the French etonnement, and the English astonishment and amazement, point out as clearly the kindred emotions which attend fear and wonder? They who have a more general knowledge of languages, could produce, I make no doubt, many other and equally ftriking examples.

SECT.

TO make any thing very terrible, obscurity: feems in general to be neceffary. When we know the full extent of any danger, when we can accuftom our eyes to it, a great deal of the apprehenfion vanishes. Every one will be fenfible of this, who confiders how greatly night adds to our dread, in all cafes of danger, and how much the notions of ghofts and goblins, of which none can form clear ideas, affect minds which give credit to the popular tales concerning fuch forts of beings. Those defpotick governments, which are founded on the paffions of men, and principally upon the paffion of fear, keep their chief as much as may be from the publick eye. The policy has been the fame in many cafes of religion. Almost all the heathen temples were dark. Even in the barbarous temples of the Americans at this day, they keep their idol in a dark part of the hut, which is confecrated to his worship. For this purpose too the druids performed all their ceremonies in the bofom of the darkeft woods, and in the shade of the oldeft and moft fpreading oaks. No perfon feems better to have underftood the fecret of

* Part IV. fect. 14, 15, 16.

heightening,

heightening, or of setting terrible things, if I may ufe the expreffion, in their strongest light, by the force of a judicious obfcurity, than Milton. His defcription of death in the fecond book is admirably studied; it is astonishing with what a gloomy pomp, with what a fignificant and expreffive uncertainty of ftrokes and colouring, he has finished the portrait of the king of terrours:

The other shape,

If fhape it might be call'd that shape had none
Diftinguishable, in member, joint, or limb;
Or fubftance might be call'd that shadow feem'd;
For each feem'd either; black he stood as night;
Fierce as ten furies; terrible as hell;

And fhook a deadly dart. What feem'd his head
The likeness of a kingly crown had on.

In this description all is dark, uncertain, confused, terrible, and fublime to the laft degree.

SECT. IV.

OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CLEARNESS AND OBSCURITY WITH REGARD TO THE PASSIONS.

IT is one thing to make an idea clear, and another to make it affecting to the imagination. If I make a drawing of a palace, or a temple, or a landVOL. I. fcape,

M

fcape, I present a very clear idea of those objects; but then (allowing for the effect of imitation, which is fomething) my picture can at most affect only as the palace, temple, or landfcape, would have affected in the reality. On the other hand, the moft lively and spirited verbal description I can give, raises a very obfcure and imperfect idea of fuch objects; but then it is in my power to raife a ftronger emotion by the defcription than I could do by the beft painting. This experience conftantly evinces. The proper manner of conveying the affections of the mind from one to another, is by words; there is a great infufficiency in all other methods of communication; and fo far is a clearness of imagery from being abfolutely neceffary to an influence upon the paffions, that they may be confiderably operated upon, without presenting any image at all, by certain founds adapted to that purpose; of which we have a fufficient proof in the acknowledged and powerful effects of inftrumental mufick. In reality, a great clearness helps but little towards affecting the paffions, as it is in fome fort an enemy to all enthufams whatsoever.

SECT.

SECT. [IV.]

THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED.

THERE are two verfes in Horace's Art of Poetry that seem to contradict this opinion, for which reafon I fhall take a little more pains in clearing it up. The verfes are,

Segnius irritant animos demissa per aures,
Quam quæ funt oculis fubjecta fidelibus.

On this the Abbé du Bos founds a criticism, wherein he gives painting the preference to poetry in the article of moving the paffions; principally on account of the greater clearness of the ideas it represents. I believe this excellent judge was led into this mistake (if it be a mistake) by his fyftem, to which he found it more conformable than I imagine it will be found by experience. I know feveral who admire and love painting, and yet who regard the objects of their admiration in that art with coolness enough in comparison of that warmth with which they are animated by affecting pieces of poetry or rhetorick. Among the common fort of people, I never could perceive that painting had much influence on their paffions. It is true, that the beft forts of painting, as well as the best forts of poetry, are not much understood in that sphere.