תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

hrate, we refent, as he infpires us; and are prompted to refolve, or to act, with vigor and warmth. Debate in popular affemblies opens the moft extenfive field to this fpecies of eloquence; and the pulpit alfo admits it.

This high species of eloquence is always the offspring of paffion. By paffion we mean that state of mind, in which it is agitated and fired by fome object in view. Hence the univerfally acknowledged power of enthusiafm in public fpeakers for affecting their audience. Hence 'all ftudied declamation and labored ornaments of style, which show the mind to be cool and unmoved, are inconsistent with perfuafive eloquence. Hence every kind of affectation in gefture and pronunciation detracts fo much from the weight of a speaker. Hence the neceffity of being, and of being believed to be, dif interested and in earnest, in order to perfuade.

In tracing the origin of eloquence it is not neceffary to go far back into the early ages of the world, or to fcarch for it among the monuments of Eastern or Egyptian antiquity. In those ages, it is true, there was a certain kind of eloquence; but it was more nearly allied to poetry, than to what we properly call oratory. While the intercourse of men was infrequent, and force was the principal mean, employed in deciding controverfies; the arts of oratory and perfuafion, of reasoning and debate, could be little known. The first empires were of the defpotic kind. A fingle perfon, or at

moft a few, held the reins of government. The multitude were accustomed to blind obedience; they were driven, not perfuaded. Confequently none of those refinements of fociety, which make public speaking an object of importance, were introduced.

Before the rife of the Grecian Republics we perceive no remarkable appearances of eloquence, as the art of perfuafion; and thefe gave it fuch a field, as it never had before, and perhaps has never had again fince that time. Greece was divided into many little ftates. These were governed at first by kings; who being for their tyranny fucceffively expelled from their dominions, there fprung up a multitude of democratical governments, founded nearly upon the fame plan, animated by the fame high fpirit of freedom, mutually jealous, and rivals of each other. Among thefe Athens was most noted for arts of every kind, but efpecially for eloquence. We fhall pass over the orators, who flourished in the early period of this Republic, and take a view of the great Demosthenes, in whom eloquence fhone with unrivaled fplendor. Not formed by nature either to please or perfuade, he ftruggled with, and furmounted, the moft formidable impediments. He fhut himself up in a cave, that he might study with lefs distraction. He declaimed by the fea fhore, that he might be used to the noife of a tumultuous affembly; and with pebbles in his mouth, that he might correct a defect in his fpeech. He practifed at

home with a naked fword hanging over his shoulder, that he might check an ungraceful motion, to which he was fubject. Hence the example of this great man affords the highest encouragement to every student of eloquence; fince it fhows how far art and application availed for acquiring an excellence, which nature appeared willing to deny.

No orator had ever a finer field, than Demofthenes in his Olynthiacs and Philippics, which are his capital orations; and undoubtedly to the greatness of the fubject, and to that integrity and public fpirit, which breathe in them, they owe much of their merit. The object is to roufe the indignation of his countrymen against Philip of Macedon, the public enemy of the lib-erties of Greece; and to guard them against the infidious measures, by which that crafty prince endeavoured to lay them afleep to danger. To attain this end, we see him using every proper mean, to animate a people, distinguished by justice, humanity, and valor ; but in many instances become corrupt and degenerate.. He boldly accufes them of venality, indolence, and indifference to the public caufe; while at the fame time he reminds them of the glory of their ancestors, and of their prefent resources. His cotemporary orators, who were bribed by Philip, and perfuaded the people to peace, he openly reproaches, as traitors to their country. He not only prompts to vigorous meafures, but lays.

down the plan of execution. His orations are ftrong ly animated, and full of the impetuofity and fire of public fpirit. His compofition is not diftinguished by ornament and fplendor. It is energy of thought, peculiarly his own, which forms his character, and fets him above all others. He feems not to attend to words, but to things. We forget the orator, and think of the subject. He has no parade; no ftudied introductions; but is like a man full of his subject, who after preparing his audience by a sentence or two for hearing plain truths enters directly on business.

The ftyle of Demofthenes is ftrong and concife ; though fometimes harsh and abrupt. His words are very expreffive, and his arrangement firm and manly. Negligent of little graces, he aims at that fublime, which lies in fentiment. His action and pronunciation were uncommonly vehement and ardent. His charac ter is of the auftere rather, than of the gentle kind. He is always grave, ferious, paffionate; never degrading himself, nor attempting any thing like pleafantry. If his admirable eloquence be in any respect faulty, it is in this,he fometimes borders on the hard and dry. He may be thought to want fmoothness and grace; which is attributed to his imitating too closely the manner of Thucydides, who was his great model for ftyle, and. whofe hiftory he tranfcribed eight times with his own. hand. But these defects are more than compensated by

that masterly force of masculine eloquence, which, as it overpowered all, who heard it, cannot in the present day be read without emotion.

ROMAN ELOQUENCE, CICERO,.

MODERN ELOQUENCE.

HAVING

AVING treated of eloquence among the Greeks, we now proceed to confider its progrefs among the Romans; where we shall find one model at least of eloquence in its moft fplendid form. The Romans derived their eloquence, poetry, and learning from the Greeks; and were far inferior to them in genius for all thefe accomplishments. They had neither their vivacity, nor fenfibility; their paffions were not so easily moved, nor their conceptions fo lively; in comparison with them they were a phlegmatic people. Their language refembled their character; it was regular, firm and stately; but wanted that expreffive fimplicity, that flexibility to fuit every different fpecies of compofition, by which the Greek tongue is peculiarly diftinguished.. Hence we always find in Greek productions more. native genius; in Roman more regularity and art.

As the Roman government, during the Republic, was of the popular kind, public speaking early became the mean of acquiring power and diftinction. But in the unpolished times of the ftate their fpeaking hardly de-.

« הקודםהמשך »