ciations and relations. These, as not
explicable from any one _external_ principle assumed as a premise by
the ancient philosopher, were rejected from the sphere of his aesthetic
creation: but to us they all have a value and meaning; being connected
by the bond of our own personality and all alike existing in that
infinity which is its arena.

"But however this may be, and comparing the Teufelsdrockhean Epopee
only with those other modern works,--it is noticeable that Rabelais,
Montaigne and Sterne have trusted for the currency of their writings, in
a great degree, to the use of obscene and sensual stimulants. Rabelais,
besides, was full of contemporary and personal satire; and seems to
have been a champion in the great cause of his time,--as was Montaigne
also,--that of the right of thought in all competent minds, unrestrained
by any outward authority. Montaigne, moreover, contains more pleasant
and lively gossip, and more distinct good-humored painting of his own
character and daily habits, than any other writer I know. Sterne is
never obscure, and never moral; and the costume of his subjects is drawn
from the familiar experience of his own time and country: and Swift,
again, has the same merit of the clearest perspicuity, joined to that
of the most homely, unaffected, forcible English. These points of
difference seem to me the chief ones which bear against the success of
the _Sartor_. On the other hand, there is in Teufelsdrockh a depth and
fervor of feeling, and a power of serious eloquence, far beyond that of
any of these four writers; and to which indeed there is nothing at
all comparable in any of them, except perhaps now and then, and very
imperfectly, in Montaigne.

"Of the other points of comparison there are two which I would
chiefly dwell on: and first as to the language. A good deal of this
is positively barbarous. 'Environment,' 'vestural,' 'stertorous,'
'visualized,' 'complected,' and others to be found I think in the first
twenty pages,--are words, so far as I know, without any authority;
some of them contrary to analogy: and none repaying by their value
the disadvantage of novelty. To these must be added new and erroneous
locutions; 'whole other tissues' for _all the other_, and similar
uses of the word _whole_; 'orients' for _pearls_; 'lucid' and 'lucent'
employed as if they were different in meaning; 'hulls' perpetually for
_coverings_, it being a word hardly used, and then only for the husk
of a nu