speaking of the dormant State of Infects, mentions an Experiment he had made, of extending that Period of their Exiftence far beyond its ufual Duration, even to fome Years. If this Philofopher could fo improve his Experiment, as to make it applicable to his own Species, might not the Discovery be turned to very singular Advantage?

ous.

For my own Part, returned Sophronius, were I Master of fuch a Secret, I would rather apply it to the mistaken Speculatift, than the falfly ambitiThe Sons of Turbulence can only affect their unfortunate Contemporaries; and the Mifchief they do, generally ends with their Lives. But the Puzzlers and Perverters of Truth and Science are pernicious, perhaps, to feveral Generations, and disturb the Repofe of the World, many Ages after they themselves are removed out of it. The firft Effay, I would make of my foporific Art in the literary World, should be upon the Critics, a Tribe of Mortals, in the Republic of Letters, more fubverfive of its Peace and Intereft, than

Hold, good Sophronius! I doubt, your Cenfure is now growing too general. Some low and petulant Spirits, I confess, have brought a Reproach upon the Name of Critic; but the Art in itself certainly deferves Efteem. No man can poffefs that Talent in its true Extent, or exercise it to full Advantage, without being Master of fomething much more valuable than Ariftotle or Longinus can teach him. He must have a certain

quick Feeling of Delicacy in Arts and Manners; which no Rules will ever be able to impart, where Nature has denied.

Hardly, Philocles, will you be able to bring me over to more favourable Sentiments of this Criticfcience, by making Delicacy a neceffary Ingredient. For by all that I could ever difcover of the true Essence of that Quality, as it is applied either to the Operations of Art, or the Conduct of Manners, it owes its whole Exiftence entirely to Fancy; and when I hear a Man recommended as a Critic of great Delicacy, I immediately conclude him a Person of high Enthusiasm.

Do you really think then, Sophronius, that Delicacy, whether confidered as a Faculty of the Mind, or as an Effect of Art, is nothing more than the Raptures of warm Imagination, entirely unfupported by any Principles of Reafon?

I will not venture to pronounce, answered Sopbronius, of the Clearness of other Men's Ideas; and, perhaps, the nice Refiners in Tafte and Genius may have Conceptions, to which common Language cannot fupply adequate Terms. But of this I am fure: whenever they talk upon the Subject; either they refolve Delicacy into a certain Je ne fçai quoi, or elfe explain it in so vague and unprecise a Manner, as to leave the Matter abfolutely undetermined, to a Mind that cannot embrace any Principle, but what it clearly apprehends.

However loosely, replied Philocles, this Term may have been used heretofore in our Language;.

or

or how much foever it is fometimes depreciated by a mistaken Application both in Writings and Converfation; yet with the most approved Authors amongst us, it feems now to have obtained a determinate Meaning, and is always mentioned by them as an high Quality, and the finishing Excellence of Compofition and Manners.

As no Man, Philocles, is more clear in his Conceptions than yourself; poffibly I may receive that Satisfaction from you, which I have in vain fought for elsewhere. Tell me then, I intreat you, wherein this Quality, according to your Notion, confifts.

Delicacy, replied Philocles, is good Sense; but good Senfe refined; which produces an inviolable Attachment to Decorum, and Sanctity as well as Elegance of Manners, with a clear Difcernment and warm Senfibility of whatever is pure, regular, and polite; and, at the fame Time, an Abhorrence of whatever is grofs, ruftic, or impure, of unnatural, effeminate, and over-wrought Ornaments of every Kind. It is, in fhort, the graceful and the beautiful added to the juft and the good.

According to this Account, faid Sophronius, Delicacy feems to be exactly the fame Thing, that Urbanity was among the Romans.

When that illuftrious People, answered Philocles, had fpread their military Fame over the World, and fubdued all the Nations around; they then turned their Attention to the Embellifhments of Life. Their Succefs was equal to

the

Dial. II. the Vigour of their Attempts; and they foon learned to polifh their Language, refine their Pronunciation, cultivate Humanity, and adorn their Manners. A Lælius and a Scipio [a] arose, and transplanted liberal Wit from Greece; which afterwards grew and profpered with a Bloom and Vigour fcarce inferior to what it drew from its native Soil.

Rome was now become the Seat of Elegance, as well as Empire: nor were her Eagles more dreaded, than her Refinement was admired. The Attainment of these Accomplishments they styled Urbanity; as they were the peculiar Characteriftics of the distinguished Inhabitants of this imperial City.

This I take to be the genuine Acceptation of that Word amongst the ancient Romans. It feems to have been confined to the Qualities I have mentioned, and never applied to the fine Arts, as Delicacy is with us, and therefore differs from it only as a Part from the whole.

To admit for the prefent, faid Sophronius, that all those Ideas are justly comprehended under the Word Delicacy, which you have collected in your Defcription-Yet by what Criterion is this Pro

[a] Scipio tam elegans liberalium artium omnifque doctrinæ et auctor et admirator fuit, ut Polybium Panætiumque præcellentes ingenio viros domi militiæque fecum habuerit. Neque quifquam hoc Scipione elegantius intervalla negotiorum otio disjunxit, femperque inter arma ac ftudia verfatus, aut corpus periculis, aut animum difciplinis exercuit.

V. PATERC. 1. i. c. 13. perty

perty in any Subject to be tried? Pn that Operation of the Faculties, which we call Reasoning, the Mind examines the Objects, as they fand in Reality and for our Direction, there is always a Standard in the Nature of Things. But is this the Cafe with regard to what Connoiffeurs call Amiable or Delicate? Beauty and Pleasure are nothing but an Agreement between the Object and the Faculty: What then can determine a Man's Approbation or Diflike in thefe Points, but the peculiar Caft of his Mind?

Though it should not be poffible, anfwered Philocles, precifely to fix the Criterion you are enquiring after; yet would it not neceffarily follow, that there is abfolutely no fuch Thing? Several Inftances might be mentioned, wherein the Mind has undoubtedly, a certain fixed Rule by which it judges when; nevertheless, it is not able to explain positively, in what that Rule con

Will not a true Judge in Painting, who has been long converfant among the noble Remains of that charming Aft, be able to diftinguish a Copy from an Original? And would not you, Sophronius, venture to give your Teftimony, in a Court of Justice, to your Friend's Hand-writing? And yet, were you, or the Commoiffeur I just now mentioned, to be asked by what Criterion you were able to determine fo affuredly in the refpective Cafes before you; neither of you, moft certainly, would be capable of afcertaining, to the Vol. I.

t

Satis