execution, as was naturally to be expected, have been more correct. In France, the style of their orators is ornamented with bolder figures; and their discourse carried on with more amplification, more warmth and elevation. The composition is often very beautiful; but sometimes, also, too diffuse, and deficient in that strength and cogency which renders eloquence powerful; a defect owing, perhaps, in part, to the genius of the people, which leads them to attend fully as much to ornament as to substance; and, in part, to the nature of their government, which, by excluding public speaking from having much influence on the conduct of public affairs, deprives eloquence of its best opportunity for acquiring nerves and strength. Hence the pulpit is the principal field which is left for their eloquence. The members, too, of the French academy, give harangues at their admission, in which genius often appears; but, labouring under the misfortune of having no subject to discourse upon, they run commonly into flattery and panegyric, the most barren and insipid of all topics. I observed before, that the Greeks and Romans aspired to a more sublime species of eloquence, than is aimed at by the moderns. Theirs was of the vehement and passionate kind, by which they endeavoured to inflame the minds of their hearers, and hurry their imagination away: and, suitable to this vehemence of thought, was their vehemence of gesture and action; the 'supplosio pedis'* the 'percussio frontis et femoris,'* were, as we learn from Cicero's writings, usual gestures among them at the bar; though now they would be reckoned extravagant any where, except upon the stage. Modern eloquence is much more cool and temperate; and in Great Britain especially, has confined itself almost wholly to the argumentative and rational. It is much of that species which the ancient critics called the Tenuis,' or 'Subtilis;' which aims at convincing and instructing, rather than affecting the passions, and assumes a tone not much higher than common argument and discourse. Several reasons may be given, why modern eloquence has been so limited and humble in its efforts. In the first place, I am of opinion, that this change must, in part, be ascribed to that correct turn of thinking, which has been so much studied in modern times. It can hardly be doubted, that, in many efforts of mere genius, the ancient Greeks and Romans excelled us; but, on the other hand, that, in accuracy and closeness of reasoning on many subjects, we have some advantage over them, ought, I think, to be admitted also. In proportion as the world has advanced, philosophy has made greater progress. A certain strictness of good sense has, in this island particularly, been cultivated, and introduced into .every subject. Hence we are more on our guard against the flowers of elocution; we are now on the watch; we are jealous of being deceived by oratory. Our public speakers are obliged to be more reserved than the ancients, in their attempts to elevate the * Vide, De Clar. Orator. imagination, and warm the passions; and by the influence of prevailing taste, their own genius is sobered and chastened, perhaps, in too great a degree. It is likely too, I confess, that what we fondly ascribe to our correctness and good sense, is owing, in a great measure, to our phlegm and natural coldness. For the vi vacity and sensibility of the Greeks and Romans, more especial ly of the former, seems to have been much greater than ours, and to have given them a higher relish of all the beauties of oratory. Besides these national considerations, we must, in the next place, attend to peculiar circumstances in the three great scenes of public speaking, which have proved disadvantageous to the growth of eloquence among us. Though the parliament of Great Britain be the noblest field which Europe, at this day, affords to a public speaker, yet eloquence has never been so powerful an instrument there, as it was in the popular assemblies of Greece and Rome. Under some former reigns, the high hand of arbitrary power bore a violent sway; and in latter times, ministerial influence has generally prevailed. The power of speaking, though always considerable, yet has been often found too feeble to counterbalance either of these; and, of course, has not been studied with so much zeal and fervour, as where its effect on business was irresistible and certain. At the bar, our disadvantage, in comparison with the ancients, is great. Among them, the judges were generally numerous; the laws were few and simple; the decision of causes was left, in a great measure, to equity and the sense of mankind. Here was an ample field for what they termed judicial eloquence. But among the moderns, the case is quite altered. The system of law is become much more complicated. The knowledge of it is thereby rendered so laborious an attainment, as to be the chief object of a lawyer's education, and in a manner, the study of his life. The art of speaking is but a secondary accomplishment, to which he' can afford to devote much less of his time and labour. The bounds of eloquence, besides, are now much circumscribed at the bar; and, except in a few cases, reduced to arguing from strict law, statute, or precedent, by which means knowledge, much more than oratory, is become the principal requisite. With regard to the pulpit, it has certainly been a great disadvantage, that the practice of reading sermons, instead of repeating them from memory, has prevailed in England. This may indeed have introduced accuracy; but it has done great prejudice to eloquence; for a discourse read is far inferior to an oration spoken. It leads to a different sort of composition, as well as of delivery; and can never have an equal effect upon any audience. Another circumstance, too, has been unfortunate. The sectaries and fanatics, before the Restoration, adopted a warm, zealous, and popular manner of preaching; and those who adhered to them, in aftertimes, continued to distinguish themselves by somewhat of the same manner. The odium of these sects drove the established church from that warmth which they were judged to have carried too far, into the opposite extreme of a studied coolness, and composure of manner. Hence, from the art of persuasion, which preaching ought always to be, it has passed, in England, into mere reasoning and instruction; which not only has brought down the eloquence of the pulpit to a lower tone than it might justly assume; but has produced this farther effect, that by accustoming the public ear to such cool and dispassionate. discourses, it has tended to fashion other kinds of public speaking upon the same model. Thus I have given some view of the state of eloquence in modern times, and endeavoured to account for it. It has, as we have seen, fallen below that splendour which it maintained in ancient ages; and from being sublime and vehement, has come down to be temperate and cool. Yet, still, in that region which it occupies, it admits great scope; and, to the defect of zeal and application, more than the want of capacity and genius, we may ascribe its not having hitherto attained higher distinction. It is a field where there is much honour yet to be reaped; it is an instrument which may be employed for purposes of the highest importance. The ancient models may still, with much advantage, be set before us for imitation though, in that imitation, we must doubtless have some regard to what modern taste and modern manners will bear; of which I shall afterwards have occasion to say more. QUESTIONS. HAVING treated of the rise of elo-four business to do? Of his virtues, and quence, and of its state among the of his orations, what is observed? How Greeks, to what do we now proceed; does he begin them; and what is said and what shall we there find? Of the of his method and arguments? In this Romans, what is observed; and what respect, how does he compare with did they always acknowledge? What Demosthenes? How is this illustrated? says Horace? As the Romans derived What is observed of his knowledge of their eloquence, poetry, and learning, the force of words; and how does he from the Greeks, what is the conse-roll them along? Of him, what is furquence? How did they compare with ther observed; and what is said of his the Greeks? What is said of their lan- manner? Of his four orations against guage? Repeat the passage here in- Cataline, what is remarked? How was troduced from Horace. In comparing he affected, when a great public object the rival productions of Greece and roused his mind? In what orations is Rome, what shall we always find? this the case? Together with those As the Roman government, during the high qualities, from what is he not exrepublic, was of the popular kind, of empt? Why is it necessary to notice what is there no doubt? But, what re- them? What prevails in most of his mark follows? Though Cicero attempts orations? What do they contain; and to give some reputation to the elder at what does he seem often to aim? Cato, yet, what does he acknowledge? Hence, what follows? Of his sentenWhen did Roman orators first rise into ces, what is observed? Where there is any note? Of Crassus and Antonius, the least room for it, of what is he alwhat is observed? What is also ob- ways full? What, in part, apologizes served of Hortensius? Who, in this pe- for this? But even after all these alriod, it most worthy of our attention; lowances are made, what impression and what does his name alone sug-do his works leave upon the mind? gest? With what, at present, have we What evidence have we that Cicero's no direct concern? How do we consi-defects were not unobserved by his der him; and in this view, what is it contemporaries? Of these censures, what is observed? What was the lows? In whose writings does this corcause of the aggravation of his defects? rupt manner begin to appear; and Of what were the former the patrons? where, also, does it show itself? Though In several of his rhetorical works, the author was a man of genius, yet in what does Cicero, in his turn, do? what is it deficient, and what do we What is given in the tenth chapter of see throughout the whole of it? the last book of Quintilian's Institu- In the decline of the Roman empire, tions? On whose side does Quintilian what gave rise to a new species of himself declare? With what observa- eloquence; and in what did it appear? tion does he conclude his remarks? Among the Latin fathers, who are the Why is a comparison between Cicero most remarkable for purity of style; and Demosthenes in many respects ob- and in a late age, of the famous Augusvious and easy? What are their diffe- tine, what is observed? But, from rent characters; and in them respec- what does it appear that none of the tively, what do we find? To account fathers afford any just models of elofor this difference, without any preju-quence? Among the Greek fathers, dice to Cicero, what has been said? who was the most distinguished; and Why is this not satisfactory? By ob- of him, what is observed? To what serving what, shall we, perhaps, come does our author now pass; and why? nearer to the truth? How is this illus- Here, what must be confessed? Of it, trated? What circumstance operates what is further observed; and notwithagainst Demosthenes? As we read Ci- standing what? How is this accounted cero with more ease, what is the con- for? In what two countries might we sequence; and what remark follows? expect to find most of the spirit of eloNotwithstanding this advantage, of quence? Why in France; and why in what opinion is our author? What ef- Great Britain? Yet what follows? Of fect would the Philippics of Demosthe- the names of Demosthenes and Cicero, nes produce on a British assembly? what is here observed? What seems What would render their effect infalli- particularly surprising; and why? On ble over any modern assembly? What this subject, what says Mr. Hume? does our author here question; and Notwithstanding this advantage, what what remark follows? On this subject, must be confessed? Of our philosowhat was the opinion of David Hume? phers, of our men of erudition, and of In favour of whom do the French cri- our historians and poets, what is obtics decide? Of P. Rapin, what is ob- served? Of our orators, what is observed? For the preference which he served; and in every period, what gives to Cicero, what reasons does he have we had? Of our pleaders at the assign; and why? How does he sup-bar, and of their pleadings, what is obport this argument? Why can nothing served? In this respect, how do the be more childish than this? Of one of French differ from us? Of the British the French critics, what is observed; divines in the pulpit, what is observed? and who is this? In what writings How is this remark illustrated? Of the does he give this judgment; and of art of preaching among us, what is obthem, what is observed? Of the reign served; and of this, what proof is of eloquence among the Romans, what given? What, in general, is the chais observed? When did it expire; and racteristical difference between the why? Under their government, what state of eloquence in France and in Great was it natural to expect? What con- Britain? In Great Britain, how have tinued to prevail; but for what was we taken up eloquence; and what is there no longer any place? By whom the consequence? In France, with is this change beautifully described; what is the style of their orators ornaand what overwhelmed all? What mented; and in what manner is their was now become a desert; and what discourse carried on? Of the composiobservation follows? How is this illus-tion, what is observed? To what is this trated? Where was the corruption of defect owing? Hence, of the pulpit, eloquence completed? What were what is observed? What is, also, said made the themes of declamation; and of the members of the French acadewhat were brought into vogue? What my? What was before observed? says Petronius Arbiter of the declaim- Their's was of what kind; and by it, ers of his time; and what remark fol- what effect did they endeavour to pro. duce? And to this vehemence of eloquence at the bar, what is observed? thought, what was suited? What do With regard to the pulpit, what has we, on this subject, learn from Cicero; been a great disadvantage? What and what is said of them? Of modern may this have introduced; but what eloquence, what is observed; and in follows? To what does it lead? What Great Britain, especially, to what has it other circumstance has been unfortuconfined itself? Of what species is it ; nate? To what did the odium of these and at what does it aim? What is the sects drive the established church? first reason assigned for the limited and Hence, what consequence has resulted? humble efforts of modern eloquence? Thus, what has been given? In it, What cannot be doubted? In what what change has taken place? Yet, in proportion has philosophy_made pro- the region which it now occupies, what gress? What, in Great Britain, has does it admit; and what remark folbeen cultivated and introduced into lows? In using the ancient models of every subject? Hence, what follows? eloquence, to what must we have some Of our public speakers, what is obser- regard? ved? What is also likely; and why? A. Cicero. ANALYSIS. Besides these national considerations, 1. The origin of Roman eloquence. a. His excellences and his defects. 2. a. The schools of the declaimers. c. A new species of eloquence. Modern eloquence. A. The eloquence of Great Britain. c. Reasons for the limitedness of modern a. The bar. LECTURE XXVII. DIFFERENT KINDS OF PUBLIC SPEAKING.-ELOQUENCE OF POPULAR ASSEMBLIES.-EXTRACTS FROM DEMOSTHENES. AFTER the preliminary views which have been given of the nature of eloquence in general, and of the state in which it has subsisted in different ages and countries, I am now to enter on the consideration of the different kinds of public speaking, the distinguishing characters of each, and the rules which relate to them. The ancients divided all orations into three kinds; the demonstrative, the deliberative, and the judicial. The scope of the demonstrative was to praise or to blame; that of the deliberative, to advise or to dissuade; that of the judicial, to accuse or to defend. The chief subjects of demonstrative eloquence, were panegyrics, invectives, gratulatory and funeral orations. The deliberative was employed in matters of public concern, agitated in the senate, or before the assemblies of the people. The judicial is the same with the eloquence of the bar, employed in addressing judges, who have power to absolve or to condemn. This division runs through all the ancient treatises on rhetoric; and is followed by the moderns, who copy them. It is a division not inartificial; and comprehends most, or all, of the matters which can be the subject of public discourse. It will, however, suit our purpose better, and be found, I imagine, more useful to fol |