THE most eminent critic and scholar of our times has, in treating of the author's writings upon the subject of Ancient Eloquence, and especially upon the Greek Orators, conferred upon him an honour to which he certainly cannot feel that he is entitled, but for which he must ever be grateful, when describing him as "certainement parmi les Modernes le Meilleur Interprete de Demosthene."—M. Villemain, Journal des Savants, 1855. DISSERTATION. : It is impossible for any but the most careless observer to avoid remarking the great differences which distinguish the Oratory of ancient from that of modern times. The immeasurable superiority of the former is far from being the only or even the principal of these diversities that proceeds in part from the greater power of the languages (especially the Greek), the instrument wielded by the great masters of diction; and in so far the superiority must remain for ever undiminished by any efforts on the part of modern rhetoricians, although extreme care applied to spoken composition may reduce the other advantages of the ancients within a very narrow compass, and give scope to certain advantages, not unimportant, which are possessed by the moderns. But there are other differences yet more broad between the two kinds of Oratory, and these require to be more minutely examined. Public speaking among the ancients bore a more important share in the conduct of affairs, and filled a larger space in the eye of the people, than it does now, or indeed ever can again. Another engine has been invented for working upon the popular mind, whether to instruct, to persuade, or to please an engine, too, of which the powers are not limited in time or in space. The people are now addressed through the Press; and all persons whatever, as well as those whom the bounds of a public assembly can contain, are thus brought in contact with the teacher, the statesman, and the panegyrist. The orator of old was the Parliamentary debater, the speaker at public meetings, the preacher, the newspaper, the published sermon, the pamphlet, the volume, all in one. When he was to speak, all Greece flocked to Athens ;* and his address was the object of anxious expectation for months before, and the subject of warm comment for months after the grand display of his powers. It is true that he sometimes committed his discourses to paper afterwards; but so rarely did this happen, that we have only preserved to us the published speeches of three or four Greek and one Latin orator; but those few which were thus written out could hardly, in the times of manuscript distribution, be said to be published at all; while of anything like the addresses now so frequent upon every occasion of importance, in the form of pamphlets, or other ephemeral productions, any work treating of the topics of the day, or any attempt by writing to influence the public mind for temporary purposes, it does not appear that there ever were examples in ancient times, if we except the speech of Archidamus, and that to Philip, both written by Isocrates. Indeed, the necessarily confined circulation of manuscript compositions, must have rendered it altogether hopeless to produce any immediate effect on the community by such means. Nor is it enough to say that the rostrum of old monopolized in itself all the functions of the press, the senate, the school, and the pulpit, in our days. It was a rival to the stage also. The people, fond as they were of theatrical exhibitions, from having no other intellectual entertainment, were really as much interested in oratorical displays, as sources of recreation. They regarded them, not merely with the interest of citizens hearing state affairs discussed * Cicero, Brutus, sub fine. in which they took a deep concern, and on which they were called to give an opinion; but as auditors and spectators at a dramatic performance, by which they were to be moved and pleased, and on which they were to exercise their critical faculties, refined by experience, and sharpened by the frequent contemplation of the purest models. That the orators of Greece and Rome regarded their art as one of eminent display, considered it their province to please as well as to move their audience, and addressed the assembly, not only as hearers who were to be convinced or persuaded, but as critics also who were to judge of rhetorical merit, is clear from numberless considerations, some of which must here be adverted to, in order to show that Ancient Oratory held a place among the Fine Arts properly so called, and was, like them, an appeal to the taste, ending in the mere pleasure of contemplation, as well as an appeal to the reason or the passions, leading to practical consequences, and having action for its result. An attention to this subject will explain many things in the structure of ancient orations, which would otherwise be with difficulty apprehended. Of the circumstances to which we have adverted as proving the position in question, some belong to the head of internal, others to that of external evidence— the former being discoverable by inspection of the compositions themselves, the latter resting upon historical evidence of facts. I.-1. The first of the things belonging to the former class which strikes an attentive student of the ancient orators, is the exquisite finish and perfect polish of their compositions. It really seems as if the fit word were always found in the appropriate place; as if, though every topic may not always be the best possible for the orator's purpose, yet everything which he intended to say was said in the best possible manner, and so that no further consideration could ever improve it. Quæ 66 |