conversation; that it was unusual.  But the first Poets, as I have said, spake a language which, though unusual, was still the language of men.  This circumstance, however, was disregarded by their successors; they found that they could please by easier means:  they became proud of modes of expression which they themselves had invented, and which were uttered only by themselves.  In process of time metre became a symbol or promise of this unusual language, and whoever took upon him to write in metre, according as he possessed more or less of true poetic genius, introduced less or more of this adulterated phraseology into his compositions, and the true and the false were inseparably interwoven until, the taste of men becoming gradually perverted, this language was received as a natural language:  and at length by the influence of books upon men, did to a certain degree really become so.  Abuses of this kind were imported from one nation to another, and with the progress of refinement this diction became daily more and more corrupt, thrusting out of sight the plain humanities of Nature by a motley masquerade of tricks, quaintnesses, hieroglyphics, and enigmas.

It would not be uninteresting to point out the causes of the pleasure given by this extravagant and absurd diction.  It depends upon a great variety of causes, but upon none, perhaps, more than its influence in impressing a notion of the peculiarity and exaltation of the Poet’s character, and in flattering the Reader’s self-love by bringing him nearer to a sympathy with that character; an effect which is accomplished by unsettling ordinary habits of thinking, and thus assisting the Reader to approach to that perturbed and dizzy state of mind in which if he does not find himself, he imagines that he is balked of a peculiar enjoyment which poetry can and ought to bestow.

The sonnet quoted from Gray, in the Preface, except the lines printed in Italics, consists of little else but this diction, though not of the worst kind; and indeed, if one may be permitted to say so, it is far too common in the best writers both ancient and modern.  Perhaps in no way, by positive example, could more easily be given a notion of what I mean by the phrase poetic diction than by referring to a comparison between the metrical paraphrase which we have of passages in the Old and New Testament, and those passages as they exist in our common Translation.  See Pope’s ‘Messiah’ throughout; Prior’s ’Did sweeter sounds adorn my flowing tongue,’ etc., etc., ’Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels,’ etc., etc. 1st Corinthians, chap. xiii.  By way of immediate example, take the following of Dr. Johnson: 

    Turn on the prudent Ant thy heedless eyes,
    Observe her labours, Sluggard, and be wise;
    No stern command, no monitory voice,
    Prescribes her duties, or directs her choice;
    Yet, timely provident, she hastes away