that is one, whole, and entire. Polybius, though not an elegant writer, is remarkable for this quality.

A historian should trace actions and events to their sources. He should therefore be well acquainted with human nature and politics. His skill in the former will enable him to describe the characters of individuals; and his knowledge of the latter to account for the revolutions of government, and the operation of political causes on public affairs. With regard to political knowledge the ancients wanted some advantages which are enjoyed by the moderns. In ancient times there was less communication among neighbouring states; no intercourse by established posts, nor by ambassadors at distant courts.Larger experience too of the different modes of government has improved the modern historian beyond the historian of antiquity.

It is however in the form of narrative, and not by dissertation, that the historian is to impart his political knowledge. Formal discussions expose him to suspicion of being willing to accommodate his facts to his theory. They have also an air of pedantry, and evidently result from want of art. For reflections, whether moral, political, or philosophical, may be insinuated in the body of a narrative.

Clearness, order, and connection are primary virtues in historical narration. These are attained when the historian is complete master of his subject; can see the whole at one view; and comprehend the dependence of all its parts.History being a dignified species of composition, it should also be conspicuous for gravity. There

R.

should be nothing mean nor vulgar in the style; no quaintness, no smartness, no affectation, no wit. A history should likewise be interesting; and this is the quality which chiefly distinguishes a writer of geuius and eloquence.

To be interesting, a historian must preserve a medium between rapid recital and prolix detail. He should know when to be concise, and when to enlarge. He should make a proper selection of circumstances. These give life, body and colouring to his narration, They constitute what is termed historical painting.

In all these virtues of narration, particularly in picturesque description, the ancients eminently excel. Hence the pleasure of reading Thucydides Livy, Sallust, and Tacitus. In historical painting there are great varieties. Livy and acitus paint in very different ways. tions of Livy are full, plain, and of acitus are short and bold.

The descripnatural; those

One embellishment, which the moderns have laid aside, was employed by the ancients. They put orations into the mouths of celebrated personages. By these, they diversified their history, and conveyed both moral and political instruction. Thucydides was the first who adopted this method; and the orations with which his history abounds, are valuable remains of antiquity. It is doubtful however, whether this embellishment should be allowed to the historian; for they form a mixture, unnatural to history, of truth and fiction. The moderns are more chaste, when on great occasions the historian delivers in his own person, the sentiments and reasonings of opposite parties.

Another splendid embellishment of history is the delineation of characters. These are consid.. ered as exhibitions of fine writing; and hence the difficulty of excelling in this province. For characters may be too shining and laboured. The accomplished historian avoids here to dazzle too much. He is solicitous to give the resemblance in a style equally removed from meanness and affectation. He studies the grandeur of simplicity.

Sound morality should always reign in history. A historian should ever show himself on the side of virtue. It is not, however, his province to deliver moral instructions in a formal manner. He should excite indignation against the designing and the vicious; and by appeals to the passions, he will not only improve his reader, but take away from the natural coolness of historical narration.

In modern times historical genius has shone most in Italy. Acuteness, political sagacity, and wisdom are all conspicuous in Machiavel, Guicciardin, Davila, Bentivoglio, and Father Paul. In Great Britain history has been fashionable only a few years. For, though Clarendon and Burnet are considerable historians, they are inferior to Hume, Robertson, and Gibbon.

The inferior kinds of historical compositions are annals, memoirs and lives. Annals are a collection of facts in chronological order; and the properties of an annalist are fidelity and distinctness. Memoirs are a species of composition in which an author pretends not to give a complete detail of facts, but only to record what he himself knew, or was concerned in, or what il

lustrates the conduct of some person, or some transaction which he chooses for his subject. It is not therefore expected of such a writer, that he possesses the same profound research, and those superior talents which are requisite in a historian. It is chiefly required of him, that he be sprightly and interesting. The French during two centuries have poured fourth a flood of memoirs; the most of which are little more than agreeable trifles. We must, however, except from this censure the memoirs of Cardinal de Retz, and those of the Duke of Sully. The former join to a lively narrative great knowledge of human nature. The latter deserve very par ticular praise. They approach to the usefulness and dignity of legitimate history. They are full of virtue and good sense; and are well calculated to form both the heads and hearts of those who are designed for public business, and high stations in the world.

Biography is a very useful kind of composition; less stately than history; but perhaps not less instructive. It affords full opportunity of displaying the characters of eminent men, and of entering into a thorough acquaintance with them. In this kind of writing, Plutarch excels; but his matter is better than his manner; he has no peculiar beauty nor elegance. His judgment and accuracy also are sometimes taxed. But he is a very humane writer, and fond of displaying great men in the gentle lights of retirement.

Before we conclude this subject, it is proper to observe, that of late years a great improvement has been introduced into historical compo

sition. More particular attention than formerly has been given to laws, customs, commerce, religion, literature, and to every thing that shows the spirit and genius of nations. It is now conceived that a historian ought to illustrate manners as well as facts and events. Whatever displays the state of mankind in different periods; whatever illustrates the progress of the human mind, is more useful than details of sieges and battles.

PHILOSOPHICAL WRITING AND DIALOGUE.

Of philosophy, the professed design is instruction. With the philosopher therefore, style, form, and dress are inferior objects. But they must not be wholly neglected. The same truths and reasonings, delivered with elegance will strike more, than in a dull and dry manner.

Beyond mere perspicuity/the strictest precision and accuracy are required in a philosophical writer and these qualities may be possessed without dryness. Philosophical writing admits a polished, neat and elegant style.) It admits the calm figures of speech; but rejects whatever is florid and tumid. Plato and Cicero have left philosophical treatises, composed with much elegance and beauty. Seneca is too fond of an affected, brilliant sparkling manner. Locke's Treatise on Human Understanding is a model of a clear and distinct philosophical style. In the writings of Shaftsbury, on the other hand, philosophy is dressed up with too much ornament and finery.

Among the ancients, philosophical writing of