means of persuasion; taking care however to recollect, that, as soon as we have reason to believe the minds of the hearers in danger of being tempted towards such a lively attention to those incidental ornaments of our discourse as will exclude from their thoughts the main subject of it, we have thus evidence that it is time to discard the assistant, which, like a spoiled domestic servant, has begun to play the part of the master.

PART III.

INTRODUCTION.

THE last division of the three, in which we undertook to treat the subject of this paper, embraces what may be called the Criticism of Rhetoric.

This branch, as it must present itself to the student, should engage him in an examination of the most celebrated efforts of eloquence which have been given to the world, either by speech or by writing, in ancient as well as in modern times; the philosophical principles of the art being assumed throughout as the standard, and the analysis of the works being instituted for the purpose of discovering the extent and particulars of their obedience to those fundamental laws, or their departure from them. In reflecting, however, on the limits within which the plan of this work necessarily and properly restricts our contribution to it, we have more than once, convinced of the inadequacy of all that could be here performed, towards aiding the student in this interesting and valuable department of his training, felt strongly inclined to content ourselves with a brief though earnest exhortation to this branch of rhetorical studies, as indispensable for all who would derive full advantage from a systematic acquaintance with the principles. But there is one consideration which imperatively forbids this. We would not willingly, it is true, be suspected of

hoping that we shall be able to convert to the orthodox doctrine any who remain incredulous after perusing the higher and more elaborate works on rhetoric; but our outline may fall into the hands of some who either have not studied the subject at all, or have not derived their notions of it from the best sources. To such readers, indeed, our illustrations are particularly addressed; and we shall have failed altogether in our purpose, if our mode of treating the subject should lead to a radical misapprehension of the relative importance belonging to the several branches into which the study of rhetoric divides itself; a result which would be not unlikely to happen, if one essential department were dismissed with a simple recommendation, how

ever warm.

But the plan adopted in our systematic section, resembling that of a map, in which the chief cities of an empire are laid down in their relative bearings, is inapplicable to the present division, in which, as we assume the office of topographers, we must select one or two narrow districts as the scene of our labours. The province from which our very few specimens will be exclusively selected, is that of Political Oratory, which offers to the student of eloquence peculiar advantages, arising chiefly from the universally acknowledged excellence of the ancient masterpieces, from the high merit, as well as interest, of many works of the kind in our own country, and from the immense variety which the compositions display, both in matter and in form.

CHAPTER I.

ANCIENT ORATORY.

In many of the qualities essential to eloquent composition, the historical writings of the moderns, and some of their philosophical works, will, at least, suffer no dishonour by comparison with those of the ancients; although on a close and comprehensive parallel they cannot, with respect to the mere manner of delivery, be fairly said to equal the philosophy and history of the heathen world. But, in Public Speaking, the Eloquence of the Ancients has left modern oratory at an immeasureable distance; and in this field the Greeks are even farther superior to the Romans, than these are to the nations of Christian Europe.

The great age of the Grecian Orators embraces scarcely three generations, and the most celebrated names are to be found about the middle of the period, all within the petty district of Attica. The critics of the Alexandrian school, when they issued in a later time that sovereign decree, which declared certain authors and no others, in every department of literature, to be classical and worthy of study, admitted into their approved list ten Attic orators, of each of whom, excepting Hyperides, we possess some remains. Antiphon, Andocides, Lycurgus, and Dinarchus, must not here detain us; and Lysias, Isocrates, and Isæus, can scarcely receive more attention, although their works are far from being un

deserving of study as models of eloquence, and are singularly instructive as illustrating, in many varied cases of private litigation, points which bear upon the merits and character of the two great orators, and which present themselves less prominently in the political, and even the judicial harangues, which have been bequeathed to us by these latter. Lysias, one of the simplest and purest of Attic writers, is especially commended by the ancient critics for his skill in the introductory and narrative parts of his orations; and Dionysius of Halicarnassus considers Isæus as closely resembling him, with less real eloquence and less nature. Isocrates, who merely composed discourses to be delivered by others, and was the teacher of all the most celebrated orators who succeeded him, is one of the greatest masters of style whom Grecian literature possesses; while he unites this quality with others of a higher class in some of his discourses, such as the oration written in the name of Archidamus, which, with another composition of the same author, is our only example of ancient political pamphlets, or argumentative discussions on temporary topics, avowedly composed for circulation, not for oral delivery. Hermogenes truly observes of him, that his failure in attaining to genuine eloquence is attributable to his inability to throw into his compositions the appearance of feeling and sincerity, or to impress those whom he addresses with that strong and favourable impression of his own character which we have considered as one of the leading ends of the orator's exertions.

The most exalted place, however, not among the Athenian orators only, but among those of ancient times in general, belongs to the two celebrated contemporaries and rivals, De