aimed at grace rather than substance. "Delectabat "Athenienses," says Cicero, "magis quam inflam"mabat." "He amused the Athenians, rather "than warmed them." And after his time, we hear of no more Grecians Orator of any note. LECTURE XXVI. HISTORY OF ELOQUENCE CONTINUED. ROMAN ELOQUENCE. CICERO. — MODERN ELOQUENCE. HAVING AVING treated of the rise of Eloquence, and of its state among the Greeks, we now proceed to consider its progress among the Romans, where we shall find one model, at least, of Eloquence, in its most splendid and illustrious form. The Romans were long a martial nation, altogether rude, and unskilled in arts of any kind. Arts were of late introduction among them; they were not known till after the conquest of Greece; and the Romans always acknowledged the Grecians as their masters in every part of learning: Grecia capta ferum victorem cepit, & artes Intulit agresti Latio.* HOR. Epist. ad Aug. As the Romans derived their Eloquence, Poetry, and Learning from the Greeks, so they must be con * When conquer'd Greece brought in her captive arts, FRANCIS. fessed to be far inferior to them in genius for all these accomplishments. They were a more grave and magnificent, but a less acute and sprightly people. They had neither the vivacity nor the sensibility of the Greeks; their passions were not so easily moved, nor their conceptions so lively; in comparison of them they were a phlegmatic nation. Their language resembled their character; it was regular, firm, and stately; but wanted that simple and expressive naïveté, and, in particular, that flexibility to suit every different mode and species of composition, for which the Greek tongue is distinguished above that of every other country: Graiis ingenium, Graiis dedit ore rotundo ARS POET. And hence, when we compare together the various rival productions of Greece and Rome, we shall always find this distinction obtain, that in the Greek productions there is more native genius; in the Roman, more regularity and art. What the Greeks invented, the Romans polished; the one was the original, rough sometimes, and incorrect; the other, a finished copy. As the Roman government, during the republic, was of the popular kind, there is no doubt but that, in the hands of the leading men, public speaking became early an engine of government, and was employed for gaining distinction and power. But, in the rude unpolished times of the State, their speaking *To her lov'd Greeks the Muse indulgent gave, To her lov'd Greeks with greatness to conceive; And in sublimer tone their language raise : Her Greeks were only covetous of praise. FRANCIS. 66 was hardly of that sort that could be called Eloquence. Though Cicero, in his Treatise, "de Claris Oratori"bus," endeavours to give some reputation to the elder Cato, and those who were his contemporaries, yet he acknowledges it to have been " Asperum et horridum genus dicendi," a rude and harsh strain of speech. It was not till a short time preceding Cicero's age, that the Roman Orators rose into any note. Crassus and Antonius, two of the Speakers in the dialogue de Oratore, appear to have been the most eminent, whose different manners Cicero describes with great beauty in that dialogue, and in his other rhetorical works. But as none of their productions are extant, nor any of Hortensius's, who was Cicero's contemporary and rival at the bar, it is needless to transcribe from Cicero's writings the account which he gives of those great men, and of the character of their Eloquence. * The object in this period most worthy to draw our attention, is Cicero himself; whose name alone suggests every thing that is splendid in Oratory. With the history of his life, and with his character as a man and a politician, we have not at present any direct concern. We consider him only as an eloquent Speaker; and, in this view, it is our business to remark both his virtues, and his defects, if he has any. His virtues are, beyond controversy, eminently great. In all his Orations there is high art. He * Such as are desirous of particular information on this head, had better have recourse to the original, by reading Cicero's three books De Oratore, and his other two treatises, intitled, the one, Brutus, Sive de Claris Oratoribus; the other, Orator ad M. Brutum; which, on several accounts, well deserve perusal. begins, generally, with a regular exordium; and with much preparation and insinuation prepossesses the hearers, and studies to gain their affections. His method is clear, and his arguments are arranged with great propriety. His method is indeed more clear than that of Demosthenes; and this is one advantage which he has over him. We find every thing in its proper place; he never attempts to move, till he has endeavoured to convince; and in moving, especially the softer passions, he is very successful. No man knew the power and force of words better than Cicero. He rolls them along with the greatest beauty and pomp; and, in the structure of his sentences, is curious and exact to the highest degree. He is always full and flowing, never abrupt. He is a great amplifier of every subject; magnificent, and in his sentiments highly moral. His manner is on the whole diffuse, yet it is often happily varied, and suited to the subject. In his four Orations, for instance, against Catiline, the tone and style of each of them, particularly the first and last, is very different, and accommodated with a great deal of judgment to the occasion, and the situation in which they were spoken. When a great public object roused his mind, and demanded indignation and force, he departs considerably from that loose and declamatory manner to which he leans at other times, and becomes exceedingly cogent and vehement. This is the case in his Orations against Anthony, and in those two against Verres and Catiline. Together with those high qualities which Cicéro possesses, he is not exempt from certain defects, of which it is necessary to take notice. For the Ciceronian Eloquence is a pattern so dazzling by its beauties, that, if not examined with accuracy and judgment, it is apt to betray the unwary into a faulty imitation; and I am of opinion, that it has sometimes produced this effect. In most of his Orations, especially those composed in the earlier part of his life, there is too much art; even carried the length of ostentation. There is too visible a parade of Eloquence. He seems often to aim at obtaining admiration, rather than at operating conviction, by what he says, Hence, on some occasions, he is showy rather than solid; and diffuse, where he ought to have been pressing. His sentences are, at all times, round and sonorous; they cannot be accused of monotony, for they possess variety of cadence; but, from too great a study of magnificence, he is sometimes deficient in strength. On all occasions, where there is the least room for it, he is full of himself. His great actions, and the real services which he had performed to his country, apologize for this in part; ancient manners, too, im-posed fewer restraints from the side of decorum; but, even after these allowances made, Cicero's ostentation of himself cannot be wholly palliated; and his Orations, indeed all his works, leave on our minds the impression of a good man, but withal, of a vain man. The defects which we have now taken notice of in Cicero's Eloquence were not unobserved by his own contemporaries. This we learn from Quinctilian, and from the author of the dialogue" de Causis "Corruptæ Eloquentiæ." Brutus, we are informed, called him, " fractum et elumbem," broken and enervated. "Suorum temporum homines," says Quinctilian, "incessere audebant eum ut tumidiorem " & Asianum, et redundantem, et in repetitionibus “nimium, et in salibus aliquando frigidum, & in |