or the Auguftan age, their writers and artifts were both in their highest perfection; and in the third, from Tiberius to the Antoniaes, they both began to languish; and then revived a little; and at lalt funk totally together.

In comparing the defcriptions of their poets with the works of art, I fhould therefore chufe to omit all the Roman poets after the Antonines. Among them all, there is perhaps no one whofe omiffion need be regretted, except that of Claudian; and even as to him it may be confidered, that he wrote when the true knowledge of the arts was no more; and when the true tafte of poetry was ftrangely corrupted and loit; even if we were to judge of it by his own writings only, which are extremely better than any of the poets long before and long after him. It is therefore much better to confine one's felf to the three great ages, than to run fo far out of one's way for a fingle poet or two; whofe authorities, after all, must be very difputable, and indeed scarce of any weight.

Spence.

§ 67. O DEMOSTHENES. I fhall not spend any time upon the circumftances of Demosthenes's life; they are well known. The ftrong ambition which he discovered to excel in the art of fpeaking; the unfuccessfulness of his firit attempts; his unwearied perfeverance in fur mounting all the difadvantages that arofe from his perfon and addrefs; his fhutting himfelf up in a cave, that he might study with lefs diftraction, his declaiming by the fea-fhore, that he might accuftom himfelf to the noife of a tumultuous affembly, and with pebbles in his mouth, that he might correct a defect in his fpeech; his practifing at home with a naked fword hanging over his thoulder, that he might check an graceful motion, to which he was fubett; all thofe circumftances, which we earn from Plutarch, are very encouraging to fuch as ftudy Eloquence, as they fhew how far art and application may avail, for acquiring an excellence which nature feemed unwilling to grant us.

68.

Blair.

DEMOSTHENES imitated the manEisquence of PERICLES. Defpiling the affected and florid manwhich the rhetoricians of that age folved, Demofthenes returned to the forle and manly eloquence of Pericles; and Arength and vehemence form the principal characteristics of his Style. Never had

orator a finer field than Demofthenes in his Olynthiacs and Philippics, which are his capital orations; and, no doubt, to the noblenefs of the subject, and to that integrity and public fpirit which eminently breathe in them, they are indebted for much of their merit. The fubject is, to rouze the indignation of his countrymen against Philip of Macedon, the public enemy of the liberties of Greece; and to guard them against the infiduous measures, by which that crafty prince endeavoured to lay them afleep to danger. In the profecution of this end, we fee him taking every proper method to animate a people, renowned for juftice, humanity and valour, but in many inftances become corrupt and degenerate. He boldly taxes them with their venality, their indolence, and indifference to the public caufe; while at the fame time, with all the art of an orator, he recalls the glory of their ancestors to their thoughts, thews them that they are still a flourishing and a powerful people, the natural protectors of the liberty of Greece, and who wanted only the inclination to exert themfelves, in order to make Philip tremble. With his cotemporary orators, who were in Philip's intereft, and who perfuaded the people to peace, he keeps no measures, but plainly reproaches them as the betrayers of their country. He not only prompts to vigorous conduct, but he lays down the plan of that conduct; he enters into par ticulars; and points out, with great exactnefs, the meatures of execution. This is the ftrain of thefe orations. They are ftrongly animated; and full of the impetuofity and fire of public fpirit. They proceed in a continued train of inductions, confequences, and demonftrations, founded on found reafon. The figures which he ufes, are never fought after; but always rife from the fubject. He employs them fparingly indeed; for fplendour and ornament are not the diftinctions of this orator's compofition. It is an energy of thought, peculiar to himfelf, which forms his character, and fets him above all others. He appears to attend much more to things than to words. We forget the orator, and think of the bufinefs. He warms the mind, and impels to action. He has no parade and oftentation; no methods of infinuation; no laboured introductions; but is like a man full of his fubject, who, after preparing his audience, by a fentence or two for hearing plain truths, enters directly on business.

Ee 3

Ibid.

§ 69.

is, on every occafion, grave, ferious, paf-
auftere, rather than the gentle kind. He
fionate; takes every thing
on a high tone;
never lets himself down,
nor attemps any
thing like pleafantry. If any fault can be
found in his admirable eloquence, it is, that
he fometimes borders on the hard and dry.
He may be thought to want fmoothnels and
grace; which Dionyfius of Halicarnafins
attributes to his imitating too clofely the
manner of Thucydides, who was his great
model for Style, and whofe hiftory he is
faid to have written eight times over with
his own hand. But thefe defects are far
more than compenfated, by that admira.
ble and mafterly force of mafculine clo
quence, which, as it overpowered all who
heard it, cannot, at this day, be read with
out emotion.

After the days of Demofthenes, Greece
loft her liberty, eloquence of courfe lan.
guifhed, and relapfed again into the feeble
manner introduced by the Rhetoricians and
Sophifts. Demetrius Phalerius, who lived
in the next age to Demofthenes, attained
indeed fome character, but he is reprefent-
ed to us as a flowery, rather than a per-
fuafive fpeaker, who aimed at grace ra
ther than fubftance.
"Delectabat Athe
"nienfes," fays Cicero, "magis quam
"inflammabat." He amufed the Athe
"nians, rather than warmed them." And
after this time, we hear of no more Gre
cian orators of any note.

Demofthenes appears to great advantage, when contrafted with Efchines, in the celebrated oration " pro Corona." Æfchines was his rival in business, and perfonal enemy; and one of the most diftinguished orators of that age. But when we read the two orations, fchines is feeble in comparison of Demofthenes, and makes much lefs impreffion on the mind. His reafonings concerning the law that was in queftion, are indeed very fubtile; but his invective against Demofthenes is general, and ill-fupported. Whereas De mofthenes is a torrent, that nothing can refift. He bears down his antagonist with violence; he draws his character in the ftrongest colours; and the particular merit of that oration is, that all the defcriptions in it are highly picturefque. There runs through it a train of magnanimity and high honour: the orator fpeaks with that ftrength and confcious dignity which great actions and public fpirit alone infpire. Both orators ufe great liberties with one another; and, in general, that unreftrained licence which antient manners permitted, even to the length of abufive names and downright fcurrility, as appears both here and in Cicero's Philippics, hurts and offends a modern ear. What thofe ancient orators gained by fuch a manner in point of freedom and boldness, is more than compenfated by want of dignity; which feems to give an advantage, in this reThe object in this period moft worthy fpect, to the greater decency of modern to draw our attention, is Cicero himself; speaking. whofe name alone fuggefts every thing that is fplendid in oratory. With the hil $70. On the Style of DEMOSTHENES. tory of his life, and with his character, as The Style of Demofthenes is ftrong and a man and a politician, we have not at concife, though fometimes, it must not be prefent any direct concern. We confider diffembled, harth and abrupt. His words him only as an eloquent fpeaker; and, in are very expreffive; his arrangement is this view, it is our bufinefs firm and manly; and, tho' far from being his virtues, and his defects, if he has em unmufical, yet it feems difficult to find in His virtues are, beyond controversy, e him that fludied, but concealed number, nently great. In all his orations there is and rhythmus, which fome of the ancient high art. He begins, generally, with a recritics are fond of attributing to him. gular exordium; and with much prepara Negligent of thofe leffer graces, one would tion and infinuation prepoffe fles the hearers, rather conceive him to have aimed at that and studies to gain their affections. His fublime which lies in fentiment. His ac- method is clear, and his arguments are ar I have been uncommonly vehement and is indeed more clear than that of Demol tions and pronunciation are recorded to ranged with great propriety. His method ardent; which, from the manner of his thenes; and this is one advantage which lieve. The character which one forms of its proper place; he never attempts to compofition, we are naturally led to be- he has over him. We find every thing in him, from reading his works, is of the move till he has endeavoured to convince:

Blair.

$71. On CICERO.

Ibid.

to remark both

and

emi

DEMOSTHENES.

On the fubject of comparing Cicero and Demofthenes, much has been faid by critical writers. The different manners of thete two princes of eloquence, and the diftinguishing characters of each, are fo ftrongly marked in their writings, that the comparison is, in many refpects, obvious and easy. The character of Demofthenes is vigour and aufterity; that of Cicero is gentleness and infinuation. In the one, you find more manliness; in the other, more ornament. The one is more harth; but more fpirited and cogent; the other more agrecable, but withal, loofer and

weaker.

To account for this difference, without any prejudice to Cicero, it has been faid, that we must look to the nature of their different auditories; that the refined Athenians followed with ease the concife and convincing eloquence of Demosthenes; but that a manner more popular, more flowery, and dec'amatory, was requiûte in fpeaking to the Romans, a people lefs acute, and Jefs acquainted with the arts of fpeech. But this is not fatisfactory. For we must obferve, that the Greek orator fpoke much oftener before a mixed multitude, than the Roman. Almost all the public business of Athens was tranfacted in popular affemblies, The common people were his hearers, and his judges. Whereas Cicero generally addreffed himself to the " Patres Confcripti," or, in criminal trials, to the Prætor, and the Select Judges; and it cannot be imagined, that the persons of highest rank and Beft education in Rome, required a more diffufe manner of pleading than the common citizens of Athens, in order to make them understand the caufe, or relish the fpeaker. Perhaps we fhall come nearer the truth, by obferving, that to unite toge

"Eloquence admits of many different forms; "and nothing can be more foolish than to enquire, by which of them an orator is to regu"late his compofition; fince every form, which is in itself juft, has its own place and ufe. "The Orator, according as circumftances require, "will employ them all; fuiting them not only to "the caufe or fubject of which he treats, but to "the different parts of that subject."

ther all the qualities, without the leafi exception, that form a perfect orator, and to excel equally in each of thofe qualities, is not to be expected from the limited powers of human genius. The highest degree of frength is, I fufpect, never found united with the highest degree of smoothness and ornament: equal attentions to both are

incompatible; and the genius that carries ornament to its utmoft length, is not of fuch a kind, as can excel as much in v teriflical difference between thefe two cegour. For there plainly lies the charac lebrated orators.

that, befides his concifenefs, which fomeIt is a difadvantage to Demofthenes, times produces obfcurity, the language, in which he writes, is lefs familiar to mot of us than the Latin, and that we are leis acquainted with the Greek antiquities than we are with the Roman. We read Cicero with more cafe, and of course with more pleafure. Independent of this circumstance too, he is no doubt, in himself, a more withstanding this advantage, I am of opiagreeable writer than the other. But notnion, that were the ftate in danger, or fome great public intereft at flake, which drew the ferious attention of men, an oration in the fpirit and ftrain of Demofthenes would have more weight, and produce greater effects, than one in the Ciceronian manner Were Demofthenes's Philippics spoken in a British affembly, in a fimilar conjuncture of affairs, they would convince and perfuade at this day. The rapid ftyle, the vehement reafoning, the difdain, anger, boldness, freedom, which perpetually animate them, would render their fuccefs infallible over any modern affembly, I question whether the fame can be faid of Cicero's orations; whofe eloquence, however beautiful, and however well fuited to the Roman tafle, yet borders oftener on declamation, and is more remote from the manner in which we now expect to hear real bufinefs and caufes of importance treated *.

moft of the French critics incline to give In comparing Demofthenes and Cicero, the preference to the latter. P. Rapin the Jefuit, in the parallels which he has drawn between fome of the moft eminent Greek

* In this judgment I concur with Mr. David Hume, in his Effay upon Eloquence. He gives it as his opinion, that, of all human productions, the Orations of Demofthenes prefent to us the models which approach the nearest to perfection.

and