&c. which are confidered as characteristic of the Goths. From the worship of Tuifto, Mannus, Herthus, (probably the fun, moon, and earth,) fcarcely any thing can be inferred: even the Incas of Peru acknowleged these for ancestors. The local knowlege of Tacitus is likewife questionable; modern commentators being nearly agreed that the authority of Pliny, his learned predeceffor, in all geographical points, is much more ftrongly corroborated by external teftimony. These topics have lately been much agitated, but have received no elucidation from the notes of Mr. Murphy, which appear to us fomewhat "bebind-hand" in point of information. Mr. M. places great reliance on the Northern Antiquities,―certainly a very curious book, but which contains only the more modern Edda. To feek for information in that work concerning the religion of the Germans during the age of Tacitus, is like searching for, primitive christianity in the Golden Legend. In the note to the 43d fection, Mr. Murphy fanctions, in fome measure, the opinion of Keyfler that the brothers Alcis, worshipped by the Naharvalians, were the Aifs or Elves. Surely there is more probability in the other opinion, that they were the fun and moon; which, it may be inferred from the older Edda, wère praised in hymns by the name Alfkir. (See Alv. 16. 6.) It were an endless talk to go through the feveral mythological and topographical objections to which different paffages are liable.

The Life of Agricola is a model of folemn biography, which has long been familiar among us: it wants the intereft of Plutarch's familiar details, but is, to a hero, the more agreeable way of being defcribed. This piece again is annotated rather copiously than completely.

The Dialogue concerning Oratory concludes the collection. However interefting, it is remarkable for a dilatation of thought which is not at all apparent in any other works of Tacitus. The scope of the piece may be illuftrated by extracting a fhort paragraph:

Need I obferve to you, that in all I have faid, I have not been fpeaking of that temperate faculty which delights in quiet times, fupported by its own integrity, and the virtues of moderation? 1 fpeak of popular eloquence, the genuine offspring of that licentioufnels, to which fools and ill-defigning men have given the name of liberty: I fpeak of bold and turbulent oratory, that inflamer of the people, and conftant companion of fedition; that fierce incendiary, that knows no compliance, and fcorns to temporife; bufy, rafh, and arrogant, but in quiet and well-regulated governments utterly unknown. Who ever heard of an orator at Crete or Lacedæmon? In thofe states a fyftem of rigorous difcipline was established by the firft principles of' the conftitution. Macedonian and Perfian eloquence are equally un

known,

known.

The fame may be faid of every country, where the plan of government was fixed and uniform.

At Rhodes, indeed, and alfo at Athens, orators exifted without number, and the reafon is, in thofe communities the people directed every thing; a giddy multitude governed, and, to fay the truth, alt things were in the power of all. In like manner, while Rome was engaged in one perpetual fcene of contention; while parties, factions, and internal divifions convulfed the ftate; no peace in the forum, in the fenate no union of fentiment; while the tribunals of justice acted without moderation; while the magiftrates knew no bounds, and no man paid refpect to eminent merit; in fuch times it must be acknowleged that Rome produced a race of noble orators; as in the wild uncultivated field the richest vegetables will often shoot up, and flourish with uncommon vigour. And yet it is fair to afk, could all the eloquence of the Gracchi atone for the laws which they impofed on their country? Could the fame, which Cicero obtained by his eloquence, compensate for the tragic end to which it brought him?

Mr. M.'s commentary contains many interefting particulars of the Roman fchool of oratory :-by way of fpecimen, we fhall infert the note concerning Seneca, as it attacks a fault with respect to taste, which is spreading in England.

This charge (of affectation) against Seneca is by no means new, Quintilian was his contemporary; he faw, and heard the man, and, in less than twenty years after his death, pronounced judgment against him. In the conclufion of the first chapter of his tenth book, after having given an account of the Greek and Roman authors, he fays, he referved Seneca for the laft place, becaufe, having always endeavoured to counteract the influence of a bad taste, he was fuppofed to be influenced by motives of perfonal enmity. But the cafe was other wife. He faw that Seneca was the favourite of the times, and, to check the torrent that threatened the ruin of all true eloquence, he exerted his best efforts to diffufe a founder judgment. He did not with that Seneca fhould be laid afide; but he could not, in filence, fee him preferred to the writers of the Auguftan age, whom that writer endeavoured to depreciate, confcious that, having chofen a different style, he could not hope to please the taste of those who were charmed with the authors of a former day. But Seneca was ftill in fashion; his partifans continued to admire, though it cannot be faid that they imitated him. He fell short of the ancients, and they were fill more beneath their model. Since they were content to copy, it were to be wished that they had been able to vie with him. He pleafed by his defects, and the herd of imitators chose the worst. They acquired a vicious manner, and flattered themselves that they refembled their mafter. But the truth is, they difgraced him. Seneca, it must be allowed, had many great and excellent qualities; a lively imagination; vaft erudition, and extenfive knowledge. He frequently employed others to make refearches for him, and was often deceived. He embraced all fubjects; in his philofophy, not always profound, but a keen cenfor of the manners, and on moral fubjects truly admirable. He has brilliant paffages, and beautiful fentiments;

fentiments; but the expreffion is in a falfe tafte, the more dangerous, as he abounds with delightful vices. You would have wished, that he had written with his own imagination, and the judgment of others. To fum up his character: had he known how to rate little things; had he been above the petty ambition of always fhining; had he not been fond of himself; had he not weakened his force by minute and dazzling fentences, he would have gained, not the admiration of boys. but the fuffrage of the judicious. At prefent, he may be read with fafety by thofe, who have made acquaintance with better models. His works afford the fairest opportunity of diftinguishing the beauties of fine writing from their oppofite vices. He has much to be approved, and even admired: but a juft fele&tion is neceffary, and it is to be regretted that he did not choose for himself. Such was the judgment of Quintilian: the learned reader will, perhaps, be glad to have the whole paffage in the author's words, rather than be referred to another book. Ex induftriâ Senecam, in omni genere eloquentie verfatum, diftuli, propter vulgatam falfo de me opinionem, quâ dammare eum, et invifum quoque habere fum creditus. Quod accidit mihi, dum corruptum, et omnibus vitiis fractum dicendi genus revocare ad feverira judicia contendo. Tum autem folus hic fere in manibus adolefcentium fuit. Quem non equidem omnino conabar excutere, fed potioribus præferri non finebam, quos ille non deftiterat inceffere, cum, diverfi fibi confcius gemeris, placere fe in dicendo poffe iis quibus illi placerent, difideret. Ama bant autem eum magis, quàm imitabantur; tantumque ab illo defluebant, quantum ille ab antiquis defcenderat. Foret enim optandum, pares, aut faltem proximos, illi viro fieri. Sed placebat propter fola vitia, et ad ca fe quifque dirigebat effingenda, quæ poterat. Deinde cum fe jactaret eodem modo dicere, Senecam infamabat. Cujus & multæ alioqui et magnæ virtutes fuerunt; ingenium facile et copiofum; plurimum ftudii ; et multarum rerum cognitio, in qua tamen aliquando ab iis, quibus inquirenda quædam mandabat, deceptus eft. Tractavit etiam omnem ferè ftudiorum materiam; in philofophiâ parum diligens, egregius tamen vitiorum infeftator. Multe in to clara que fententiæ; multa etiam morum gratiâ legenda; fed in eloquendo corrupta pleraque, atque eo perniciofiffima, quod abundat dulcibus vitiis. Velles eum fuo ingenio dixiffe, alieno judicio. Nam fi aliqua contempfiffet; fi parum concupiffet, fi non omnia fua amaffet; fi rerum pondera minutiffimis fententiis non fregiffet, confenfu potius eruditorum, quàm puererum amore comprobaretur. Verùm fic quoque jam robuftis, et feveriere genere fatis firmatis, legendus, vel ideo, quod exercere poteft utrimque judicium. Multa enim (ut dixi) probanda in eo, multa etiam admiranda funt; eligere modo cure fit, quod utinam ipfe feciffet. Quintil. lib. x. cap. 1. From this it is evident, that Seneca, even in the meridian of his fame and power, was confidered as the grand corruptor of eloquence. The charge is, therefore, renewed in this Dialogue, with Arict propriety. Rollin, who had nourished his mind with ancient literature, and was, in his time, the Quintilian of France, has given the fame opinion of Seneca, who, he fays, knew how to play the critic on the works of others, and to condemn the strained metaphor, the forced conceit, the tinfel fentence, and all the blemishes of a corrupt ftyle, without defiring to weed them out of his own productions. In a letter to his friend, Seneca admits a general depravity of taste, and

with great acuteness, and, indeed, elegance, traces it to its fource, to the luxury and effeminate manners of the age: he compares the florid orators of his time to a fet of young fops, well powdered and perfumed, juft iffuing from their toilette: Barba et coma nitidos, de capfula totes; he adds, that fuch affected finery is not the true ornament of a man. Non eft ornamentum virile, concinnitas. And yet, fays Rollin, he did not know that he was fitting to himfelf for the picture. He aimed for ever at fomething new, far fetched, ingenious, and pointed. He preferred wit to truth and dignified fimplicity. The marvellous was with him better than the natural; and he chofe to furprise and dazzle, rather than merit the approbation of fober judgment. His talents placed him at the head of the fashion, and with those enchanting vices which Quintilian afcribes to him, he was, no doubt, the perfon who contributed moft to the corruption of tate and eloquence. See Rollin's Belles Lettres, vol. i. fur le Gout. Another eminent critic, L'ABBE GEDOYN, who has given an elegant tranflation of Quintilian, has, in the preface to that work, entered fully into the question concerning the decline of eloquence. He admits that Seneca did great mifchief, but he takes the matter up much higher. He traces it to OviD, and imputes the taste for wit and fpurious ornament, which prevailed under the emperors, to the falfe, but feducing charms of that celebrated poet. Ovid was, undoubtedly, the greatest wit of his time; but his wit knew no bounds. His fault was exuberance. Nefcivit quod bene ceffit relinquere, fays Seneca, who had himfelf the fame defect. Whatever is Ovid's fubject, the redundance of a copious fancy fill appears. Does he bewail his own misfortunes? he feems to think that, unless he is witty, he cannot be an object of compaffion. Does he write letters to and from difappointed lovers? the greateft part flows from fancy, and little from the heart. He gives us the brilliant for the pathetic. With thefe faults, Ovid had fuch enchanting graces, that his ftyle and manner infected every branch of literature. The tribe of imitators had not the genius of their mafter; but, being determined to fhine in fpite of nature, they ruined all true tafte and eloquence. This is the natural progrefs of imitation, and Seneca was well aware of it. He tells us that the faults and blemishes of a corrupt ftyle are ever introduced by fome fuperior genius, who has rifen to eminence in bad writing his admirers imitate a vicious manner, and thus a falfe tafte goes round from one to another. Hee vitia unus aliquis inducit, fub quo tunc eloquentia eft: cæteri imitantur; et alter alteri tradunt. Epift. 114. Seneca, however, did not know that he was defcribing himfelf. Tacitus fays, he had a genius fuited to the taste of the age. Ingenium amænum et temporis ejus auribus accommodatum. He adopted the faults of Ovid, and was able to propagate them. For thefe reafons, the Abbé Gedoyn is of opinion, that Ovid began the mifchief, and Seneca laid the axe to the root of the tree. certain that, during the remaining period of the empire, true eloquence never revived.'

:

It is

On the whole, we think that Mr. Murphy has deposited a very valuable offering on the altar of public inftruction; the

produce,

produce, no doubt, of many years of induftry. Paffages may be found which will feem to have been rendered indolently or verbosely but who can long and inceffantly labour with unvarying zeal, and with unremitting ardour of attention?

ART. XV. Sketches of the Origin, Progrefs, and Effects of Mufic, with an Account of the antient Bards and Minstrels. Illuftrated with various Hiftorical Facts, interefting Anecdotes, and Poetical Quotations. By the Rev. Richard Eaftcott, of Exeter. 8vo. Pp. 277. 55. Boards. Robinfons. 1793..

T

His entertaining compilation feems to be the work of an enthufiaftic admirer not only of the art of mufic but also of its profeffors. The author's candour, and difpofition to be pleased, are very uncommon: fince there are more mufical, perhaps, than religious fects, and there are very few writers on the art who do not manifeftly lean toward a favourite and exclufive ftyle of compofition and performance: but this gentleman fteers clear of all fidlmg quarrels and mufical factions, fecking and relating nothing which does not reflect honour on his favourite art and its votaries.

In the preface, we are told that,

The author of the following Sketches has availed himself of those common fources of information which lie open to every reader. For many years he has been in the habit of mixing with mufical people, both profeffors and amateurs, and has attended the most celebrated mufical feftivals in London and other large cities: thefe opportunities furnished him with much information, and the reflections which naturally fucceeded, excited in him a ftrong defire to fearch into the origin, progress, and effects, of an art which appears to command the paffions in an eminent degree, and to communicate fo much delight to mankind.'

Mr. E. feems to be as well acquainted with the prefent state of mufic, particularly in this country, as he is fedulously defirous of doing justice to the abilities and talents of living distinguished profeffors.

Having liberally availed himfelf of Dr. Burncy's researches relative to the hiftory, progrefs, and effects, of antient mufic in those parts of the world which were first civilized, he has given, in a note, at the end of the preface, a very just elage on that celebrated mufical hiftorian.

Chap. I. treats of the ftate of mufic among the Egyptians, Hebrews, Greeks, Romans, &c. with fome curfory remarks on other arts and Sciences.

What the author here cites from Goguet's Origin of Laws, concerning the Phyficians of antient Egypt, is fo curious and little known, that we fhall prefent it to our readers: