Ch. X. guifh one individual from another. It is indeed admirable, that the human vifage, in which uniformity is fo prevalent, fhould yet be fo marked as to leave no room for mistaking one perfon for another. The difference, though clearly perceived, is often fo minute as to go beyond the reach of defcription. A correspondence so perfect betwixt the human mind and the works of nature, is extremely remarkable. The oppofition betwixt variety and uniformity is fo great, that one would not readily imagine they could both be relished by the fame palate; at least not in the fame object, nor at the fame time. It is however true, that the pleafures they afford, being happily adjusted to each other, and readily mixing in intimate union, are frequently produced in perfection by the fame individual object. Nay further, in the objects that touch us the most, uniformity and variety are conftantly combined; witnefs natural objects, where this combination is always found in perfection. It is for that reason, that natural objects readily form themselves into groups, and are agreeable in whatever manner combined: a wood with its trees, fhrubs, and herbs, is agreeable; the music of birds, the lowing of cattle, and the murmuring of a brook, are in conjunction delightful; though they ftrike the ear without modulation or harmony. short, nothing can be more happily accommodated to the inward conftitution of man, than that mixture of uniformity with variety which the eye difcovers in natural objects. And accordingly, the mind is never more highly gratified than in contemplating a natural landscape.

CHA P. X. Congruity and Propriety.

M

In

AN is diftinguished from the brute creation, not more remarkably by the fuperiority of his rational faculties, than by the greater delicacy of his perceptions and feelings. With refpect to

the

the grofs pleasures of fenfe, man probably has little fuperiority over other animals. Some obfcure perception of beauty may alfo fall to their fhare. But they are probably not acquainted with the more delicate conceptions of regularity, order, uniformity, or congruity. Such refined conceptions, being connected with morality and religion, are referved to dignify the chief of the terrestrial creation. Upon this account, no difcipline is more suitable to man, or more congruous to the dignity of his nature, than that by which his tafte is refined, to diftinguish in every fubject, what is regular, what is orderly, what is fuitable, and what is fit and proper. *.

No difcerning perfon can be at a lofs about the meaning of the terms congruity and propriety, when applied to drefs, behaviour, or language; that a decent garb, for example, is proper for a judge, modest behaviour for a young woman, and a lofty style for an epic poem. In the following examples every one is fenfible of an unfuitablenefs or incongruity a little woman funk in an overgrown thingale, a coat richly embroidered covering coarfe and dirty linen, a mean subject in an elevated ftyle, or an elevated fubject in a mean style, a first minifter darning his wife's ftocking, or a reverend prelate in lawn fleeves dancing a hornpipe.

L 5

far

But

*Nec vero illa parva vis naturæ eft rationifque, quod unum hoc animal fentit quid fit ordo, quid fit quod deceat in factis dictifque, qui miodus. Itaque eorum ipforum, quæ afpectu fentiuntur, nullum aliud animal, pulchritudinem, venuftatem, convenientiam partium, fentit. Quam fimilitudinem natura ratioque ab oculis ad animum tranfferens, multo etiam magis pulchritudinem, conftantiam, ardinem, in confiliis factifque confervandum putat, cavetque ne quid indecorè effeminatève faciat; tum in omnibus et opinionibus et factis ne quid libidinosè aut faciat aut cogitet. Quibus ex rebus conflatur et efficitur id, quod quærimus, honeftum. Cicero de officiis, 1. 1.

Ch. X. But it is not fufficient that thefe terms be understood in practice; the critical art requires, that their meaning be traced to its foundation in human nature. The relations that connect objects together, have been examined in more than one view. Their influence in directing the train of our perceptions, is handled in the firft chapter; and in the fecond, their influence in generating paffion. Here they must be handled in a new view; for they are clearly the occafion of congruity and propriety. We are fo framed by nature, as to require a certain fuitablenefs or correfpondence among things connected by any relation. This fuitablenefs or correfpondence is termed congruity or propriety; and the want of it, incongruity or impropriety. Among the many principles that compose the nature of man, a fenfe of congruity or propriety is one. Destitute of this fenfe, we could have no notion of congruity or propriety: the terms to us would be unintelligible.

As

*From many things that pafs current in the world without being generally condemned, one at firft view would imagine, that the fenfe of congruity or propriety hath fcarce any foundation in nature; and that it is ra ther an artificial refinement of those who affect to diftinguish themfelves by a certain delicacy of tafte and behaviour. The fulfome panegyrics bestowed upon the great and opulent, in epiftles dedicatory and other fuch compofitions, lead naturally to that thought. Did there prevail in the world, it will be faid, or did nature fuggeft, a taste of what is fuitable, decent, or proper, would any good writer deal in fuch compofitions, or any man of fenfe receive them without difguft? Can it be fuppofed, that Lewis XIV. of France was endued by nature with any fenfe of propriety, when, in a dramatic performance purpofely compofed for entertainment, he fuffered himfelf, publickly and in his prefence, to be ftyled the greateft king ever the earth produced? Thefe it is true are ftrong

As this fenfe is difplayed upon relations, it is reafonable beforehand to expect,, that we fhould be fo formed, as to require among connected objects a degree of congruity proportioned to the degree of the relation. And upon examination we find this to hold in fact. Where the relation is ftrong and intimate as betwixt a cause and its effect, a body and its members, we require that the things be fuited to each other in the ftri&teft manner. On the other hand, where the relation is flight, or accidental,. as among things jumbled together in the fame place, we demand little or no congruity. The ftrictest propriety is required in behaviour and manner of living; becaufe a man is connected with thefe by the relation of caufe and effect. The fituation of a great house ought to be lofty; for the relation betwixt an edifice and the ground it stands upon, is of the most intimate kind. Its relation to neighbouring hills, rivers, plains, being that of propinquity only, demands but a small share of congruity. Among members of the fame club, the congruity ought to be confiderable, as well as among things. placed for fhow in the fame niche. Among paffengers in a stage-coach, we require very little congru-· ity; and lefs ftill at a public fpectacle.

Congruity is fo nearly allied to beauty, as com-monly to be held a fpecies of it. And yet they dif-fer fo effentially, as never to coincide. Beauty, like colour, is placed upon a single subject; congruity upon a plurality. Further, a thing beauti-ful in itfelf, may, with relation to other things, produce the ftrongeft fenfe of incongruity.

Congruity

ftrong facts; but luckily they do not prove the fenfe of propriety to be artificial. They only prove, that the fenfe of propriety is at times overpowered by pride and vanity; which is no fingular cafe, for this fometimes is s the fate even of the fenfe of justice,

Congruity and propriety are commonly reckoned fynonymous terms; and hitherto in opening the fubject they are used indifferently. But they are distinguishable; and the precife meaning of each must be afcertained. Congruity is the genus, of which propriety is a fpecies. For we call nothing propriety, but that congruity or fuitableness, which ought to fubfift betwixt fenfible beings and their thoughts, words, and actions.

In order to give a full view of this subject, I fhall trace it through some of the most confiderable relations. The relation of a part to the whole, being extremely intimate, demands the utmost degree of congruity. For that reafon, the slightest deviation is disgustful. Every one must be sensible of a grofs incongruity in the Lutrin, a burlesque poem, being clofed with a serious and warm panegyric on Lamoignon, one of the King's judges:

-Amphora cœpit

Inftitui; currente rota, cur urceus exit?

No relation affords more examples of congruity and incongruity, than that betwixt a fubject and its ornaments. A literary performance intended merely for amusement, is fufceptible of much ornament, as well as a mufic-room or a play-house. In gaiety, the mind hath a peculiar relish for show and decoration. The moft gorgeous apparel, however unfuitable to an actor in a regular tragedy, difgufts not at an opera. 'The truth is, an opera, in its prefent form, is a mighty fine thing; but as it deviates from nature in its capital circumftances, we look not for any thing natural in thofe which are acceffary. On the other hand, a ferious and important fubject, admits not much ornament *

nor

*Contrary to this rule, the introduction to the third volume of the Characteristics, is a continued chain of me

taphors.