distinguish Voltaire's manner of thinking on religious subjects, yet it contains so many enlarged and instructive views, as justly to merit the attention of all who either read or write the history of those ages

QUESTIONS.

TOWARDS the close of the last lec-, talent has this historian? To consider ure, on what subject did our author what, do we next proceed? Why does enter? What is the general idea of much depend on the manner of narrahistory? Hence, arise what? What tion? How may we be convinced of was principally considered, in the last the truth of this remark? What is the lecture? To observe what does our au- first virtue of historical narration? To thor next proceed? To do this, what attain this, what is requisite ; and why? two things are especially necessary? Without this, what can we not expect? Why is the former necessary, and why For this end, on the observance of what the latter? To form what, must both will much depend; and on what, also, concur? With regard to political know-will much depend? What is the highledge, what is observed? In ancient est test of the abilities of an historian? times, what was the state of the world? What is the next requisite in historical What influence did this exert over the narration? What must not appear in knowledge and materials of the ancient it; and why? What does our author historians? And what is also to be ob- not say? Why may he sometimes do served? Hence, to what are they less this with propriety? But of what should attentive? What remark follows? To he be careful, and what remark folthese reasons, what is owing? How is lows? If a historian possesses these this remark illustrated from the Greek qualities, and is still a dull writer, what historians, from Livy, and from Sallust? will be the consequence? What must Of what does our author not mean to he therefore study; and of it, what is censure all the ancient historians? observed? What two things especially Illustrate this remark from Thucydides, conduce to this? What is the effect of Polybius, and Tacitus. But when we the former; and of the latter? Wha demand from the historian profound must an historian that would inters and instructive views of his subject, us, do? What is the next thing to be what is not meant? What information attended to? Of general fact, what is should he give us; and with what jobserved? By means of what, does a should he make us acquainted? Where narration become interesting and affectshould he place us? But having puting to the reader? What is the effect into our hands the proper materials for of these; and what is it properly term Judgment, of what should he not be ed? In all these virtues of narration, too prodigal; and why? By what who eminently excel; and hence, what should history instruct us? On what follows? Of Herodotus, what is here occasions may the narrative be allowed observed? Though the manner of Thuto stand still for a little? On such oc- cydides be more dry and harsh, yet, on casions, what may the historian do; but what occasions does he display a very of what must he be careful? When ob- strong and masterly power of descripservations are to be made concerning tion? Of Xenophon's Cyropa dia, and human nature in general, on the pe- his Anabasis, what is observed, but culiarities of particular characters, what is a much inferior work? What is what is remarked? What is the first here remarked of Sallust? And of Livy, nstance given to illustrate this remark; what is observed? What instance is and of it, what is observed? What given? What are the particulars? Re other thought, in the same historian, peat the passage which then follows, as has a finer effect; and of it, what is re- it is here introduced. Of the rest of the marked? What other instance of the story, what is observed? same kind have we? Into what gene- What is observed of Tacitus; and ral observation, was there room for how do his descriptions compare with turning this remark? But of the man- those of Livy? What course does he ner in which Tacitus introduces it, pursue? What example is given; and what is observed? What particular of it, what is remarked? Throughout

all of his works, what does he show?, Flanders, by Famianus Strada, and of How is this remark illustrated? How Strada himself, what is observed ? Of does he paint; and what does he, be- the French, and of their later historical yond all writers, possess? With many writers, what is observed? What, of the most distinguished beauties, however, have they not done? What however, what is further observed of is remarked of Great Britain? By him? What embellishment did the an- means of whom did Scotland early cients employ, which the moderns have make some figure; and of him, what laid aside? By means of these, what is observed? Why are his political did they do? Who was the first who views inaccurate and imperfect? What introduced this method? Of the orations is said of the manner in which he rewith which his history abounds, and of cords the transactions of his own times? those of some other Greek and Latin What is observed of Lord Clarendon? historians, what is observed? What, What is the character of Bishop Burhowever, may be much questioned? net, as an historical writer? During a Why does our author think they are long period, at what only did English unsuitable to it? Of these orations, authors seem to aim? What is said of what do we know? Of this sort of po- Hume, Robertson, and Gibbon? What etical liberty, what is observed? How was observed in a preceding lecture? is this illustrated? Instead of inserting What are annals commonly understood formal orations, what method has been to signify? What, therefore, is all that adopted by later writers? Of the draw-is required in a writer of annals? What ing of characters, what is observed; sort of composition do memoirs denote ? and why? What does he bring to- What, therefore, is not expected from a gether? What are the requisites of the writer of memoirs? What is chiefly rewriter who would characterize in an quired of him? Of this species of wiinstructive and masterly manner? ting, what is observed? About what, What is here said of the Greek histo- therefore, is there no wonder? What rians; and of Sallust and Tacitus? two must be excepted from this general Why should sound morality reign in character? Of the former, what is obhistory? In what should the author al- served? What is observed of the Meways show himself to be on the side of moirs of the Duke of Sully? What pe virtue? What falls not within his pro- culiar advantage have they? Of Bivince; but, what do we expect from ography, or the writing of lives, what him? What derogate greatly from the is observed? To what may a writer of weight of historical composition; and lives descend? What is expected of what additional effect will they have? him; and why? In this species of wriWhen are we most interested in the ting, who has no small merit, and what transactions which are going on? But is observed of him? For what is he reby whom cannot this effect be pro-markable? Without noticing what, duced? As the observations hitherto cannot our author close the subject of made have mostly respected the an- history? What is now understood to cient historians, what may naturally be be the business of an able historian; expected? Where has historical ge- and what remark follows? To whom nius, in later ages, shone forth with are we most indebted for this improvemost lustre? From what does it appear ment; and what is said of him? What. that the natural character of the Ital- was one of the first great works in this ians favours it? Accordingly, what fol- taste, and what was its effect? What is lowed; and of them, what is observed? observed of his essay on the general In their manner of narration, upon history of Europe, since the days or whom are they formed; and of some of Charlemagne ? them, what is remarked? In what may they be esteemed to have surpassed the ancients? But what have critics, at the same time, observed? Of Machiavel, what is remarked? With what Is Guicciardin taxed? What is observed of Bentivoglio, and of Davila? What remark follows? Of the wars of

ANALYSIS. 1. Historical writing.

A. Actions and events to be traced to their springs.

a. An aquaintance with human nature. b. Political knowledge.

B. The proper qualities of historical nar

ration.

a. Clearness, order, and due connexion. b. Gravity to be maintained.

c. The narration should be interesting. (a.) The ancients eminent for this quality.

c. Orations employed by the ancients.

D. The drawing of characters.

E. Morality, an indispensable requisite. F. Distinguished modern historians 2. Annals.

3. Memoirs.
4. Biography.

LECTURE XXXVII.

PHILOSOPHICAL

WRITING.-DIALOGUE.-EPISTOLA

RY WRITING.-FICTITIOUS HISTORY.

As history is both a very dignified species of composition, and, by the regular form which it assumes, falls directly under the laws of criticism, I discoursed of it fully in the two preceding lectures. The remaining species of composition, in prose, afford less room for critical observation.

Philosophical writing, for instance, will not lead us into any long discussion. As the professed object of philosophy is to convey instruction, and as they who study it are supposed to do so for instruction, not for entertainment, the style, the form, and dress of such writings, are less material objects. They are objects, however, that must not be wholly neglected. He who attempts to instruct mankind, without studying, at the same time, to engage their attention, and to interest them in his subject by his manner of exhibiting it, is not likely to prove successful. The same truths and reasonings, delivered in a dry and cold manner, or without a proper measure of elegance and beauty, will make very different impressions on the minds of men.

It is manifest that every philosophical writer must study the utmost perspicuity, and, by reflecting on what was formerly delivered on the subject of perspicuity, with respect both to single words and the construction of sentences, we may be convinced that this is a study which demands considerable attention to the rules of style and good writing. Beyond mere perspicuity, strict accuracy and precision are required in a philosophical writer. He must employ no word of uncertain meaning, no loose nor indeterminate expressions; and should avoid using words which are seemingly synonymous, without carefully attending to the variations which they make upon the idea.

To be clear, then, and precise, is one requisite which we have a title to demand from every philosophical writer. He may possess this quality, and be, at the same time, a very dry writer. He should, therefore, study some degree of embellishment, in order to render his composition pleasing and graceful. One of the most agreeable, and one of the most useful embellishments, which a philosopher can employ, consists in illustrations taken from historical facts, and the characters of men. All moral and political subjects naturally afford scope for these; and wherever there is room for employing them,

they seldom fail of producing a happy effect. They diversify the composition; they relieve the mind from the fatigue of mere reasoning, and at the same time raise more full conviction than any reason ings produce for they take philosophy out of the abstract, and give weight to speculation, by showing its connexion with real life, and the actions of mankind.

Philosophical writing admits besides of a polished, a neat, and elegant style. It admits of metaphors, comparisons, and all the calm figures of speech, by which an author may convey his sense to the understanding with clearness and force, at the same time that he entertains the imagination. He must take great care, however, that all his ornaments be of the chastest kind, never partaking of the florid or the tumid; which is so unpardonable in a professed philosopher, that it is much better for him to err on the side of naked simplicity, than on that of too much ornament. Some of the ancients, as Plato and Cicero, have left us philosophical treatises composed with much elegance and beauty. Seneca has been long and justly censured for the affectation that appears in his style. He is too fond of a certain brilliant and sparkling manner; of antithesis and quaint sentences. It cannot be denied, at the same time, that he often expresses himself with much liveliness and force: though his style, upon the whole, is far from deserving imitation. In English, Mr. Locke's celebrated Treatise on Human Understanding, may be pointed out as a model, on the one hand, of the greatest clearness and distinctness of philosophical style, with very little approach to ornament; Lord Shaftesbury's writings, on the other hand, exhibit philosophy dressed up with all the ornament which it can admit; perhaps with more than is perfectly suited to it.

Philosophical composition sometimes assumes a form under which it mingles more with works of taste, when carried on in the way of dialogue and conversation. Under this form the ancients have given us some of their chief philosophical works; and several of the moderns have endeavoured to imitate them. Dialogue writing may be executed in two ways, either as direct conversation, where none but the speakers appear, which is the method that Plato uses; or as the recital of a conversation, where the author himself appears, and gives an account of what passed in discourse, which is the method that Cicero generally follows. But though those different methods make some variation in the form, yet the nature of the composition is at bottom the same in both, and subject to the same laws.

A dialogue, in one or other of these forms, on some philosophical, moral, or critical subject, when it is well conducted, stands in a high rank among the works of taste; but is much more difficult in the execution than is commonly imagined: for it requires more than merely the introduction of different persons speaking in succession. It ought to be a natural and spirited representation of real conversa tion; exhibiting the character and manners of the several speakers, and suiting to the character of each, that peculiarity of thought and expression which distinguishes him from another. A dialogue, thus conducted, gives the reader a very agreeable entertainment; as by

means of the debate going on among the personages, he receives a fair and full view of both sides of the argument, and is at the same time amused with polite conversation, and with a display of consistent and well supported characters. An author, therefore, who has genius for executing such a composition after this manner, Las it in his power both to instruct and to please.

But the greatest part of modern dialogue writers have no idea of any composition of this sort; and bating the outward forms of conversation, and that one speaks and another answers, it is quite the same as if the author spoke in person throughout the whole. He sets up a Philotheus, perhaps, and a Philatheos, or an A and a B ; who, after mutual compliments, and after admiring the fineness of the morning or evening, and the beauty of the prospects around them, enter into conference concerning some grave matter; and all that we know farther of them is, that the one personates the author, a man of learning, no doubt, and of good principles; and the other is a man of straw, set up to propose some trivial objections, over which the first gains a most entire triumph, and leaves his skeptical antagonist, at the end, much humbled, and generally, convinced of his error. This is a very frigid and insipid manner of writing; the more so, as it is an attempt toward something, which we see the author cannot support. It is the form, without the spirit, of conversation. The dialogue serves no purpose, but to make awkward interruptions; and we should with more patience hear the author con tinuing always to reason himself, and remove the objections that are made to his principles, than be troubled with the unmeaning appearance of two persons, whom we see to be in reality no more than one. Among the ancients, Plato is eminent for the beauty of his diaJogues. The scenery, and the circumstances of many of them, are beautifully painted. The characters of the sophists, with whom Socrates disputed, are well drawn: a variety of personages are exhibited to us; we are introduced into a real conversation, often supported with much life and spirit, after the Socratic manner. For richness and beauty of imagination, no philosophic writer, ancient or modern, is comparable to Plato. The only fault of his imagination is, such an excess of fertility as allows it sometimes to obscure his judgment. It frequently carries him into allegory, fiction, enthusiasm, and the airy regions of mystical theology. The philoso pher is, at times, lost in the poet. But whether we be edified with the matter or not, (and much edification he often affords,) we are always entertained with the manner; and left with a strong impression of the sublimity of the author's genius.

Cicero's dialogues, or those recitals of conversation, which he has introduced into several of his philosophical and critical works, are not so spirited, nor so characteristical, as those of Plato. Yet some, as that De Oratore especially, are agreeable and well supported. They show us conversation carried on among some of the principal persons of ancient Rome, with freedom, good breeding, and digni ty. The author of the elegant dialogue. De Causis Corruptæ Eloquentiæ, which is annexed sometimes to the works of Quintisian,