the unfitness of their language to this fubject; a defect which even Cicero is compelled to confels, and more fully makes appear, when he writes philofophy himself, from the number of terms which he is obliged to invent. Virgil feems to have judged the most truly of his countrymen, when, admitting their inferiority in the

See Cic. de Fin. I. C. 1, 2, 3. III. C. 1, 2, 4, &c. but in particular Tufc. Difp. I. 3, where he fays, "Philofophia jacuit ufque ad hanc ætatem, nec ullum habuit lumen literarum Latinarum : quæ illuftranda & excitanda nobis eft; ut fi," &c. See allo Tufc. Difp. IV. 3. and Acad. I. 2. where it appears, that until Cicero applied himself to the writing of philofophy, the Romans had nothing of the kind in their language, except fome mean performances of Amafanius the Epicurean, and others of the fame fect. How far the Romans were indebted to Cicero for philofophy, and with what industry, as well as eloquence, he cultivated the fubject, may be teen not only from the titles of thote works that are now loft, but much more from the many noble ones ftili fortunately preferved.

The Epicurean poet Lucretius, who flourished nearly at the fame time, ieems by his filence to have overlooked the Latin writers of his own fect; deriving all his philofophy, as well as Cicero, from Grecian sources; and, like him, acknowledging the difficulty of writing philofophy in Latin, both from the poverty of the toi gue, and from the novelty of the fubject.

Nec me animi fallit, Graiorum obfcura reperta
Difficile inluftrare Latinis verfibus efle,
(Multa novis rebus præfertim quum fit agen-
dum,)

Propter egeftatem linguæ et rerum novitatem:
Sed tua me virtus tamen, et fperata voluptas
Suavis amicitiæ quemvis perferre laborem
Suadet

Lucr. 1. 237.

In the fame age, Varro, among his numerous works, wrote fome in the way of philofophy; as did the patriot Brutus a treatife concerning virtue, much applauded by Cicero; but thefe works are now loft.

Soon after the writers above mentioned, came Horace, fome of whole fatires and epiftles may be juftly ranked among the moft valuable pieces of Latin philofophy, whether we confider the purity of their ftyle, or the great addrels with which they treat the fubject.

After Horace, though with as long an interval as from the days of Auguftus to thofe of Nero, came the latinit Perfius, the friend and difciple of the ftoic Cornutus; to whofe precepts, as he did honour by his virtuous life, fo his works, though Imall, fhew an early proficiency in the fcience of morals. Of him it may be faid, that he is almoft the fingle difficult writer among the Latin claffics, whofe meaning has fufficient merit to make it worth while to labour through his obfcurities.

In the lame degenerate and tyrannic period lived alfo Seneca; whole character, both as a man and a writer, is difcufied with great accuracy by the noble author of the Characteristics, to whom we refer.

more elegant arts, he concludes at laft with his ufual majetty:

Tu regere imperio populos, Romane, mements, (Hæ tibi erunt artes) pacifque imponere morem, Parcere fubjectis, et debellare fuperbos.

From confidering the Romans, let us pafs to the Greeks. The Grecian commonwealths, while they maintained their

Under a milder dominion, that of Hadrian and the Antonines, lived Aulus Gellius, or (as fame call him) Agellius, an entertaining writer in the milcellaneous way, well killed in criticism and antiquity; who, though he can hardly be entitled to the name of a philofopher, yet deferves not to país unmentioned here, from the curious fragments of philofophy inter perfed in his works.

With Aulus Gellius we range Macrobius, not becaufe a contemporary (for he is fuppofed to have lived under Honorius and Theodofius) but from his near refemblance, in the character of a writt His works, like the other's, are miscellaneou; filled with mythology and ancient literature, fone philofophy being intermixed. His Commentary upon the Somnium Scipionis of Cicero may be cen fidered as whelly of the philofophical kind.

In the fame age with Aulus Gellius, flourished Apuleius of Madura in Africa, a Platonic writer, whole matter in general far exceeds his perplexed and affected ftyle, too conformable to the faile thetoric of the age when he lived.

Of the fame country, but of a later age, and a harsher ftyle, was Martianus Capella, if indeed he deferve not the name rather of a philologist, than of a philofopher.

After Capella we may rank Chalcidias the Platonic, though both his age, and country, and region, are doubtful. His manner of writing is rather more agreeable than that of the two preceding, nor does he appear to be their inferior in the knowledge of philofophy, his work being a laudable commentary upon the Timæus of Plato.

The laft Latin philofopher was Boëthius, whe was defcended from fome of the nobleft of the Roman families, and was conful in the beginning of the fixth century. He wrote many philofophical works, the greater part in the logical way. But his ethic piece, "On the Confolation of Philofophy," and which is partly profe and partly verfe, for the ftyle; in which laft he approaches the po delerves great encomiums both for the matter and rity of a far better age than his own, and is in all ready mentioned. By command of Theodoric, refpects preferable to thofe crabbed Africans alking of the Goths, it was the hard fate of this worthy man to fuffer death; with whom the Latin tongue, and the last remains of Roman dignity, may be faid to have funk in the waitera

world.

There were other Romans, who left philofophi cal writings; fuch as Mufonius Rufus, and the two emperors, Marcus Antoninus and Julian; but as thefe preferred the ufe of the Greek tongue to their own, they can hardly be confidered among

the number of Latin writers.

And fo much (by way of fketch) for the Latin authors of philofophy; a fmall number for fo vaft an empire, if we consider them as all the product of near fix fucceffive centuries.

liberty,

liberty, were the most heroic confederacy that ever exifted. They were the politeft, the braveft, and the wifeft of men. In the fhort space of little more than a century they became fuch itatefmen, warriors, orators, hiftorians, phyficians, poets, critics, painters, fculptors, architects, and (at of all) philofophers, that one can hardly help confidering that golden period, as a providential event in honour of human nature, to shew to what perfection the fpecies might afcend *.

Now the language of thefe Greeks was truly like themfelves; it was conformable to their tranfcendant and univerfal genius. Where matter fo abounded, words followed of courfe, and thofe exquifite in every kind, as the ideas for which they stood. And hence it followed, there was not a fubject to be found which could not with propriety be expreffed in Greek.

Here were words and numbers for the

If we except Homer, Hefiod, and the Lyne poets, we hear of few Grecian writers betre the expedition of Xerxes. After that moFarch had been defeated, and the dread of the Patan power was at an end, the effulgence of Grecian genius (if I may use the expreffion) broke forth, and thone till the time of Alexaner the Macedonian, after whom it difappeared, and never role agun. This is that golden pe9 ipokea of above. I do not mean that Greece had not many writers of great merit fubfequent to that period, and efpecially of the philofophic kind; but the great, the striking, the fublime (call it as you pleafe) attained at that time to a height, to which it never could afcend in any

after age.

Who were more different in exhibiting their philofophy, than Xenophon, Plato, and his difciple Ariftotle? Different, I fay, in their character of compofition; for, as to their philofophy itself, it was in reality the fame. Ariftotle, ftrict, methodic, and orderly; fubtle in thought; fparing in ornament; with little addreis to the paffions or imagination; but exhibiting the

racy of their commonwealths; wasted their ftrength; made them jealous of each other; and thus paved a way for the contemptible kingdom of Macedon to enflave them all, and afcend in a few years to univerfal monarchy.

A like luxuriance of profperity fowed difcord among the Romans; railed thofe unhappy contests between the fenate and the Gracchi; between Sylla and Marius; between Pompey and Cæfar; till at length, after the last struggle for liberty by thofe brave patiots, Brutus and Caffius at Philipp', and the fusiequent defeat of Antony at Actium, the Romans became fubject to the dominion of a fellow citizen.

It must indeed be confeffed, that after Alexander and Octavius had established their menar chics, there were many bright geniufes, wha were eminent under their government. Arifto, tle maintained a friendship and epiftolary correfpendence with Alexander. In the time of the fame monarch lived Theophraftus, and the cynic Diogenes. Then alfo Domofthenes and

fchines fpoke their two celebrated orations. So likewife, in the time of Octavius, Virgil wrote his Eneid, and with Horace, Varius, and many other fine wiiters, partook of his protec tion and royal munificence. But then it must be remembered, that thefe men were bred and educated in the principles of a fice government. It was hence they derived that high and manly fpirit which made them the admiration of after-ages. The fucceffors and forms of government left by Alexander and Octavius, foon stopt the growth of any thing farther in the kind. So true is that nable faying of Longinus-Θρέψαι τι γὰρ ἱκανὴ τὰ εξανήματα των μεγαλογείτων ή ΕΛΕΥΘΕΡΙΑ, Σ' ἐπελ» τις; δ' αμα διαθεῖν τὸ πείθυμον τῆς πρὸς ἀλλήλες, ἐμίδες, καὶ τῆς περὶ τὰ πρωτεῖα φιλοτιμίας. “It is liberty that is formed to nurfe the fentiments of great genutes; to infpire them with hopes to push forward the propensity of conteft one with another, and the generaus emulation of being the first in rank." De Subl. Sect. 44.

whole

whole with fuch a pregnant brevity, that in every fentence we feem to read a page. How exquifitely is this all performed in Greek! Let thofe, who imagine it may be done as well in another language, fatisfy themselves, either by attempting to tranflate him, or by perufing his tranflations already made by men of learning. On the contrary, when we read either Xenophon or Plato, nothing of this method and ftrict order appears. The formal and didactic is wholly dropt. Whatever they may teach, it is without profefling to be teachers; a train of dialogue and truly polite addrefs, in which, as in a mirror, we behold human life adorned in all its colours of fentiment and manners.

And yet, though thefe differ in this manner from the Stagyrite, how different are they likewife in character from each other!-Plato, copious, figurative, and majeftic; intermixing at times the facetious and fatiric; enriching his works with tales and fables, and the myflie the ology of arcient times. Xenophon, the pattern of perfect fimplicity; every where finooth, harmonious, and pure; declining the figurative, the marvellous, and the myftic; afcending but rarely into the fablime; nor then fo much trufting to the colours of style, as to the intrinfic dignity of the fentiment itself.

The language, in the mean time in which he and Plato wrote, appears to fuit fo accurately with the flyle of both, that when we read either of the two, we cannot help thinking, that it is he alone who has hit its character, and that it could not have appeared fo elegant in any other

It were to be wifhed, that thofe amorgft us, who either write or read with a view to employ their liberal leifure (for as to fuch as do either from views more fordid, we leave them, like flaves, to their defined drudgery) it were to be wifhed, I fay, that the liberal (if they have a relifh for letters) would infpect the finished models of Grecian literature; that they would not waste thofe hours, which they cannot recal, upon the meaner productions of the French

and English prefs; upon that furgon growth of novels and of pamphlets, where it is to be feared, they rarely find any n tional pleafure, and more rarely fill any folid improvement.

To be competently skilled in ancient learning is by no means a work of faci infuperable pains. The very progrefs i felf is attended with delight, and refemb's a journey through fome pleafant country, where, every mile we advance, new chain arife. It is certainly as eafy to be aft's lar, as a gamefter, or many other characters equally illiberal and low. The fame application, the fame quantity of habit, will fit us for one as completely as for the other. And as to thofe who tell us, with an air of feeming wifdom, that it is me. and not books, we mul study to become knowing; this I have always remarke from repeated experience, to be the cor mon confolation and language of durce.. They fhelter their ignorance under a fes bright examples, whofe tranfcendent abilities, without the common helps, have been fufficient of themfelves to great important ends. But alas!

Decipit exemplar vitiis imitabile

and

In truth, each man's understanding, when ri; ened and mature, is a comparte of natural capacity, and of fuperindac-d habit. Hence the greatest men w be neceflarily those who poffefs the be capacities, cultivated with the bed. bits. Hence alio moderate capacinos, when adorned with valuable fcience, wil far tranfceni others the most acute by p ture, when either neglected, or applied to low and bafe purpofes. And thes, fr the honour of culture and good learn.r. they are able to render a man, if he wi. take the pain, intrinsically more excel'eat than his natural fuperiors..

Harris.

longer,

At length, after various plunges and valius efcapes, it was totally annihilated in the fifteenth century by the victorious arms of Mahomet the Great.

The interval between the fall of thefe two empires (the Weftern or Latin in the fifth century, the Eastern or Grecian in the fifteenth) making a space of near a thousand years, conflitutes what we call the Middle Age.

Dominion paffed during this interval into the hands of rede, illiterate men: men who conquered more by multitude than by military fkill; and who, having little or no tafte either for fciences or arts, naturally defpifed thofe things from which they had reaped no advantage.

This was the age of Monkery and Legends; of Leonine verfes, (that is, of bad Latin put into rhime ;) of projects, to decide truth by ploughfhares and battoons; of crufades, to conquer infidels, and extirpate heretics; of princes depofed, not as Creus was by Cyrus, but one who had 10 armies, and who did not even wear a fword.

Different portions of this age have been distinguished by different defcriptions: fuch as Sæculum Monotheleticum, Sæculum Eiconoclafticum, Sæculum Obfcurum, SæcuLim Ferreu.n, Sæculum Hildibrandinum, &c.; frange names it must be confeft, fame more obvious, others lefs fo, yet none tending to furnish us with any high or promifing ideas.

And yet we must acknowledge, for the honour of humanity and of its great and divine Author, who never forfakes it, that feme fparks of intellect were at all times vible, through the whole of this dark and dreary period. It is here we must look for the tafte and literature of the times.

(meaning the Alcoran) there is without "them, in the book of God, all that is "fufficient. But if there be any thing in "them repugnant to that book, we in no

refpe& want them. Order them there"fore to be all deftroyed.' Amrus, upon "this ordered them to be difperfed through "the baths of Alexandria, and to be there "burnt in making the baths warm. After "this manner, in the space of fix months, they were all confumed."

The hiftorian, having related the flory, adds from his own feelings, "Hear what "was done, and wonder!"

Thus ended this noble library; and thus began, if it did not begin fooner, the age of barbarity and ignorance. Ibid.

209. Aert Hiftorical Account of ATHENS, from the Time of her PERSIAN Triumphs to that of her becoming Jubject to the TURKS.-Sketch, during this long Interval, of her Political and Literary State; of her Philofophers; of ber Gymnafa; of her good and bad For

tune,

tune, &c. &c.-Manners of the prefent Inhabitants.-Olives aud Honey.

When the Athenians had delivered themfelves from the tyranny of Pififtratus, and after this had defeated the vaft efforts of the Perfians, and that against two fucceffive invaders, Darius and Xerxes, they may be confidered as at the fummit of their national glory. For more than half a century afterwards they maintained, without controul, the fovereignty of Greece.

As their tafte was naturally good, arts of every kind foon rofe among them, and flourished. Valour had given them reputation; reputation gave them an afcendant; and that afcendant produced a fecurity, which left their minds at eafe, and gave them leifure to cultivate every thing liberal or elegant.

It was then that Pericles adorned the city with temples, theatres, and other beautiful public buildings. Phidias, the great fculptor, was employed as his architect; who, when he had erected edifices, adorned them himself, and added ftatues and bafforelievos, the admiration of every beholder. It was then that Polygnotus and Myro painted; that Sophocles and Euripides wrote; and, not long after, that they faw the divine Socrates.

Hur.an affairs are by nature prone to change; and flates, as well as individuals, are born to decay. Jealoufy and ambition infenfibly fomented wars: and fuccefs in thefe wars, as in others, was often various. The military ftrength of the Athenians was first impaired by the Lacedemonians; after that, it was again humiliated, under Epaminondas, by the Thebans; and, lait of all, it was wholly crushed by the Macedonian Philip.

But though their political fovereignty was loft, yet, happily for mankind, their love of literature and arts did not fink along with it.

Juit at the clofe of their golden days of empire, flourished Xenophon and Plato, the difciples of Socrates; and from Plato defcended that race of philofophers called the Old Academy.

Ariftotle, who was Plato's difciple, may be faid not to have invented a new philofophy, but rather to have tempered the fublime and rapturous myfteries of his maf

For thefe hiftorical facts, confult the ancient and modern authors of Grecian hiftory.

ter with method, order, and a ftricter mode of reasoning.

Zeno, who was himself alfo educated in the principles of Platonifm, only differed from Plato in the comparative eftimate of things, allowing nothing to be intrinfically good but virtue, nothing intrinfically bad but vice, and confidering all other things to be in theinfelves indifferent.

He too, and Ariftotle, accurately cultivated logic, but in different ways: for Ariflotle chiefly dwelt upon the fimple fyllogim; Zeno upon that which is derived out of it, the compound or hypothetic. Both too, as well as other philofophers, cultivated rhetoric along with logic; holding a knowledge in both to be requifite for thofe who think of addreffing mankind with all the efficacy of perfuafion. Zeno elegantly illustrated the force of these two powers by a fimile, taken from the hand: the clofe power of logic he compared to the fift, or hand compreft; the diffufe power of logic, to the palm, or hand open.

I fhall mention but two fects more, the New Academy, and the Epicurean.

The New Academy, fo called from the Old Academy (the name given to the fchool of Plato) was founded by Arcefilas, and ably maintained by Carneades. From a miftaken imitation of the great parent of philofophy, Socrates, (particularly as he appears in the dialogues of Plato) becaule Socrates doubted fome things, therefore Arcefilas and Carneades doubted all.

Epicurus drew from another fource: Democritus had taught him atoms and a void. By the fortuitous concourfe of atoms be fancied be could form a world, while by a feigned veneration he complimented away his gods, and totally denied their providential care, left the trouble of it should impair their uninterrupted state of blifs. Virtue he recommended, though not for the fake of virtue, but pleafure; pleature, according to him, being our chief and fovereign good. It must be confeti, however, that though his principles were erroneous, and even bad, never was a man more temperate and humane; never was a man more beloved by his friends, or more cordially attached to them in affectionate efteem.

We have already mentioned the alliance between philofophy and rhetorick. This cannot be thought wonderful, if rhetorick be the art by which men are perfuaded, and if men cannot be perfuaded without a knowledge of human nature: for what,

but