Early Christianity, with its delighted recognition of the soul’s reality, its awful consciousness of inner depths unplumbed, had produced, as we saw, many words describing human emotions by their _effects_, and especially by their effects on the soul’s relation to the Divine. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, with the increase of self-consciousness among the leisured classes, a more sympathetic, “introspective”[67] attitude to the emotions grew up, and this we traced to its development in the romantic _sensibility_ of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. How did it fare, then, with this tender nursling in the years that followed? Was it crushed and dissected into a neatly labelled little corpse, or was it suffered to grow up unchecked, uneducated, into the middle-aged and well-fed _sentimentalism_ of our Victorian ancestors? Fortunately it avoided both these fates. Carefully tended by small groups of earnest men, now in this academy and now in that, it had escaped the dissection of Nature because it had learned not to draw its nourishment from Nature and the God of Nature, but from man himself. And on this diet it had thriven and waxed until it was a veritable young giant, able to stand up and confront Nature as her equal. But we must retrace our steps a little. Attentive readers of Jane Austen’s novels will have noticed the slightly unfamiliar way in which she employs the two words _romantic_ and _picturesque_. A closer examination reveals the fact that in her time they still bore traces of their origin. These adjectives are taken from the arts, _romantic_ meaning in the first instance ‘like the old Romances’, and _picturesque_ ‘like a picture’ or ‘reminding one of a picture.’ They are thus members of a quite considerable group of words and phrases, _attitude_, _comic_, _dramatic_, _lyrical_, _melodramatic_, _point of view_, and the like, in which terms taken in the first place from the arts are subsequently applied to life. Nowadays we sometimes go farther and use the name of a particular artist, speaking, for instance, of a _Turneresque_ sunset, a _Praxitelean_ shape; or we even call to our aid a writer’s fictitious creatures, as in “_Falstaffian_ morality”, “the _Pickwickian_ sense”,... Such a figure of speech looks at first sight like any other kind of imagery, and we perhaps imagine it in use since the beginnings of art. In point of fact, however, it is probable that it was not known before the time of the Renaissance, when men’s notions of art changed so suddenly, when, indeed, their very consciousness of it as a separate, unrelated activity, something which can be distinguished in thought from a “craft”, a “trade”, or a religious ceremony, seems to have first sprung into being. Moreover, the ancient word _art_ used to include in its purview not only these meanings, but also most of those which we now group under the heading _science_. In the Middle Ages the Seven Liberal Arts[68]—_Grammar_,