It has been often observed that the language of savages is highly metaphorical, and what is commonly called poetical ; that nations in their earlier stage show a peculiar fondness and aptitude for poetry. The truth is, that there exists in the mind of man a natural craving for individuality. We gain knowledge by generalising from individual objects], and we are always eager to re-embody our abstractions. Even in the most civilised state, there is a perpetual tendency in the mom of mankind towards " realism," while the consistent and Lamiliaruse of ab stract terms and symbols implies long and severe discipline of the reason ing powers. These feelings are the •I-oundwork of all allegory. If we reflect a moment, we know that " justice " means that disposition of mind which we see exhibited by individuals who are called "just," yet we speak of her as if she were a real existing being, and paint her with a pair of scales and a sword. Thus the appetite for the imitative arts is one deeply implanted in man; he cannot be satisfied unless cha racter or action lie embodied to the eye by colour or form, or brought vividly before the mind by the description of the poet. Abstract terms are indistinct, and require metaphors or similes to give them anise...um° and make them palpable to the apprehension. One of the moat wonderful phenomena connected with the Greeks is, that while the genius of the people constantly tended, as Bishop Thirlwall says, to embody the spiritual and personify the indefinite, they excelled no less in the dry and abstract studies of philosophy. If Homer, if "Eschyliss and Sophoeles, have never been rivalled in poetry, it was Aristotle on the other hand who analysed with the greatest precision the process of human reasoning, and left us in his Ethics' and his ' Politics ' treatises which are still instructive in their respective departments.
We must now proceed to say something of the diction of poetry. Words are the instruments of the poet ; they are the tools with which he works. We think that Mr. Wordsworth pushes his theory of simple language a little too far. We fully sympathise with his Ee jection of " those phrases and figures of speech which from father to son have long been regarded as the common inheritance of poets." Such conventional forms of expression at last become adverse to the very object of all poetry ; instead of conveying any definite or sub stantial image, they degenerate into mere formulas of the vaguest and most unsatisfactory kind. But, just as metre at once gives pleasure by its adaptation to the subject-matter, and forms a sort of framework in which the poet exhibits his composition to the reader, so may language, by its appropriateness and by its dissimilitude to the phraseology of common life, supply another twofold source of pleasure. There are ballads, and even larger compositions, in which the simple and homely diction suits the treatment of the subject and adds force and strength to the expression. But, who will say that in such a work as the 'Agamemnon ' of iEschylus, where the whole drama is knit together by one pervading feeling of mysterious dignity, the language should not bear a proportion to the other Tialities of the work "Let gorgeous tragedy In sceptered pall come sweeping by :" stately and ornate diction is a part of her trappings.
It remains to speak briefly of the different moulds into which a subject may be cast by a poet, and according to which we call a poem epic, dramatic, lyric, &c. There is great difficulty in this part of our subject. The ancients, indeed, applied such terms as " epos," or "elegeion," to the outward form only, but, in modern language, the matter of a poem, its length, or its mode of treatment, often decides the class to which it is commonly assigned. Moreover, there are many works of a mixed character which we cannot place in any recognised division. To what gentle do Dante's Divine Commedia,' Wordaworth's ' Excursion,' and Spenser e' Fairy Queen' respectively belong ? Certain broad distinctions may, however, bo laid down, though they be inca pable of definite application in every instance.
I. A poem may be in the form of a narrative of events which the poet professes to recount ; although he sometimes introduces his heroes as speaking in the first person, and uses the historical present tense for the sake of greater energy, still the events are supposed to be pad. The subject-matter is external, that is to say, the writer does not merely pour forth his own feelings as excited by certain actions or circumstances, but describes the actions or circumstances them selves. Of this kind is all epic and narrative poetry.
2. A poet may develops the action to the reader or supposed spec tator by imagining that the personages of the story show its progress and their own characters by what they themselves say and do, not by what the author narrates of them. Hero the time is supposed to be present, and the subjectanatt er still more purely external. Dramatic poetry, with all its numerous subdivisions, is of this kind.
3. The author may principally aim at expressing the overflow of his own emotions and his own sentiments, instead of narrating what is past, or supposing something present to bo acted before us. Ilium object will then be to awaken an echo of similar feelings in the reader or hearer, and thus imitate the action of those impulses which have previously excited such feelings in his own mind. Most short com positions intended to be sung belong to this class. If the tone of thought is enthusiastic and the metre irregular, we call the work an ode; if it express tender or mournful feelings in a more regular form, it is an elegy; the name of " sonnet " marks the outward form only. Perhaps no general word can be found so applicable to the greater part of those compositions, which are neither epic nor dramatic, as the term " lyrical," though it does not seem in any usual sense to include epigram, satire, or didactic poems.
The different classes of poetry are further treated of under the heads