expreffing the different paffions; and it must be acknowledged, that in this attempt he hath exhausted the whole power of language. At the fame time, every perfon of difcernment will perceive, that these rules avail little in point of inftruction: the very words he employs, are not intelligible, except to thofe who beforehand are acquainted with the subject.

To vary the scene a little, I propose to close with a flight comparison between finging and pronouncing. In this comparison, the five following circumflances relative to articulate found, must be kept in view. 1ft, A found or fyllable is harsh or fmooth 2d, It is long or fhort. 3d, It is pronounced high or low. 4th, It is pronounced loud or foft. And, laftly, A number of words in fucceffion, conftituting a period or member of a period, are pronounced flow or quick. Of these five the first depending on the component letters, and the fecond being afcertained by cuftom, admit not any variety in pronouncing. The three laft are arbitrary, depending on the will of the perfon who pronounces; and it is chiefly in the artful management of thefe that jut pronunciation confifts. With refpect to the first circumftance, mufic has evidently the advantage; for all its notes are agreeable to the ear; which is not always the cafe of articulate found. With respect to the fecond, long and short fyllables varioufly combined, produce a great variety of feet; yet far inferior to the variety that is found in the multiplied combinations of mufical notes. With refpect to high and low notes, pronunciation is ftill more inferior to finging; for it is obferved by Dionyfius of Halicarnaffus, that in pronouncing, i. e. without altering the aperture of the windpipe, the voice is confined within three notes and a half: finging has a much greater compafs. With refpect to the two laft circumftances, pronunciation equals finging.

In this chapter, I have mentioned none of the beauties of language but what arife from words taken in their proper fenfe. Beauties that depend on the metaphorical and figurative power of words, are referved to be treated chap. 20.

De ftructura orationis, fect, 2.

SECT.

TH

VERSIFICAT 1.0 N.

HE mufic of verfe, though handled by every grammarian, merits more attention than it has been honoured with. It is a fubje&t intimately connected with human nature; and to explain it thoroughly, feveral nice and delicate feelings must be employ'd. But before entering upon it, we muft fee what verfe is, or, in other words, by what mark it is diftinguished from profe; a point not fo eafy as may at first be apprehended. It is true that the conftruction of verfe is governed by precife rules; whereas profe is more loofe, and fcarce fubjected to any rules. But are the many who know nothing of rules, left without means to make the diftinction? and even with respect to the learned, muft they apply the rule before they can with certainty pronounce whether the compofition be profe or verfe? This will hardly be maintained; and therefore, inftead of rules, the ear muft be appealed to as the proper judge. But what gain we by being thus referred to another ftandard; for it ftill recurs, By what mark does the ear diftinguish verfe from profe? The proper and fatisfactory answer is, That thefe make different impreflions upon every one who hath an ear. This advances us one ftep in our inquiry.

Taking it then for granted, that verfe and profe make upon the ear different impreffions; nothing remains but to explain this difference, and to affign its caufe. To this end, I call to my aid an obfervation made above upon the found of words, that they are more agreeable to the ear when compofed of long or fhort fyllables, than when all the fyllables are of the fame fort: a continued found in the fame tone, makes not a mufical impreffion: the fame note fucceffively renewed by intervals, is more agreeable; but ftill makes not a mufical impreflion. To produce that impreffion, variety is neceffary as well as number: the fucceflive founds or syllables, must be fome of them long, fome of them fhort; and if alfo high and low, the mufic is the more perfect. The mufical impreffion made by a period confifting of

long

long and fhort fyllables arranged in a certain order, is what the Greeks call rhythmus, the Latins numerus, and we melody or measure. Cicero juftly obferves, that in one continued found there is no melody: "Numerus "in continuatione nullus eft." But in what follows he is wide of the truth, if by numerus he mean melody or mufical measure: "Diftinctio, et æqualium et fæpe va"riorum intervallorum percuffio, numerum conficit; "quem in cadentibus guttis, quod intervallis diftingu

untur, notare poffumus." Falling drops, whether with equal or unequal intervals, are certainly not mufic: we are not fenfible of a mufical expreffion but in a fucceffion of long and fhort notes. And this alfo was probably the opinion of the author cited, though his expreffion be a little unguarded *.

It will probably occur, that melody, if it depend on long and fhort fyllables combined in a sentence, may be found in profe as well as in verfe; confidering efpecially, that in both, particular words are accented or pronounced in a higher tone than the reft; and therefore that verfe cannot be diftinguished from profe by melody. merely. The obfervation is juft; and it follows, that the diftinction between them, fince it depends not fingly on melody, mutt arife from the difference of the melody which is precifely the cafe; though that difference cannot with any accuracy be explained in words; all that can be faid is, that verfe is more musical than profe, and its melody more perfect. The difference between verfe and profe, refembles the difference in mufic properly fo called between the fong and the recitative and the resemblance is not the lefs complete, that thefe differences, like the fhades of colours, approximate fometimes fo nearly as scarce to be difcernible: the melody

* From this paffage, however, we discover the etymology of the Latin term for mufical expreffion. Every one being fenfible that there is no mufic in a continued found; the firft inquiries were probably carried no farther than to discover, that to produce a musical expreffion a number of founds is neceffary; and mufical expreflion obtained the name of numerus, before it was clearly afcertained, that variety is neceffary as well as number.

lody of a recitative approaches fometimes to that of a fong; which, on the other hand, degenerates fometimes toward a plain recitative. Nothing is more diftinguishable from profe, than the bulk of Virgil's Hexameters: many of thofe compofed by Horace, are very little removed from profe: Sapphic verfe has a very fenfible melody that, on the other hand, of an Iambic, is extremely faint *.

us.

This more perfect melody of articulate founds, is what diftinguisheth verfe from profe. Verfe is fubjected to certain inflexible laws; the number and variety of the component fyllables being afcertained, and in fome measure the order of fucceffion. Such reftraint makes it a matter of difficulty to compofe in verfe; a difficulty that is not to be furmounted but by a peculiar geniUfeful leffons convey'd to us in verfe, are agreeable by the union of mufic with inftruction: but are we for that reafon to reject knowledge offered in a plainer drefs? That would be ridiculous; for knowledge is of intrinfic merit, independent of the means of acquifition; and there are nany, not lefs capable than willing to inftruct us, who have no genius for verfe. Hence the ufe of profe; which, for the reafon now given, is not confined to precife rules. There belongs to it, a certain melody of an inferior kind, which, being extremely ornamental, ought to be the aim of every writer but for fucceeding in it, practice is neceffary more than genius. Nor do we rigidly infit for melodious profe: provided the work convey inftruction, its chief end, we are the lefs follicitous about its drefs.

Having afcertained the nature and limits of our fubject, I proceed to the laws by which it is regulated. Thefe would be endless, were verfe of all different kinds to be taken under confideration. I propofe therefore to confine the inquiry, to Latin or Greek Hexameter, and to French and English Heroic verfe; which perhaps

may

* Mufic, properly fo called, is analyfed into melody and harmony. A fucceffion of founds fo as to be agreeable to the ear, conftitutes melody: harmony arises from coexisting founds. Verfe therefore can only reach melody, and not harmony.

may carry me farther than the reader will chufe to follow. The obfervations I fhall have occafion to make, will at any rate be fufficient for a fpecimen; and thefe, with proper variations, may eafily be transferred to the compofition of other forts of verse.

Before I enter upon particulars, it must be premised in general, that to verfe of every kind, five things are of importance. 1ft, The number of fyllables that compofe a verfe. 2d, The different lengths of fyllables, i. e. the difference of time taken in pronouncing. 3d, The arrangement of thefe fyllables combined in words. 4th, The paufes or ftops in pronouncing. 5th, Pronouncing fyllables in a high or a low tone. The three first mentioned are obviously effential to verfe: if any of them be wanting, there cannot be that higher degree of melody which diftinguisheth verfe from profe. To give a juft notion of the fourth, it must be obferved, that paufes are neceffary for three different purposes: one, to feparate periods, and members of the fame period, according to the fenfe: another, to improve the melody of verfe and the laft, to afford opportunity for drawing breath in reading. A paufe of the firft kind is variable, being long or fhort, frequent or lefs frequent, as the fenfe requires. A paufe of the fecond kind, being determined by the melody, is in no degrée arbitrary. The laft fort is in a measure arbitrary, depending on the reader's command of breath. But as one cannot read with grace, unlefs, for drawing breath, opportunity be taken of a paufe in the fenfe or in the inelody, this paufe ought never to be diftinguished from the others; and for that reafon may be laid afide. With refpect then to the paufes of fenfe and of melody, it may be affirmed without hesitation, that their coincidence in verfe is a capital beauty: but as it cannot be expected, in a long work efpecially, that every line fhould be so perfect; we shall afterward have occafion to fee, that the paufe neceffary for the fenfe must often, in some degree, be facrificed to the verfe-paufe, and the latter fometimes to the former.

The pronouncing fyllables in a high or low tone, contributes alfo to melody. In reading, whether verfe or profe, a certain tone is affumed, which may be called

the