one of his favorite faints, brought it to Magliabechi, as a prefent. He had read it over the way above mentioned; only the title-page, and the heads of the chapters; and then thanked him very kindly for his excellent treatife. The author, in fome pain, afked him, "Whether that was all he intended to read of his book?" Magliabechi coolly answer ́ed, “Yes; for I know very well every thing that is in it." My author for this anecdote endeavoured to account for it in the following manner: Magliabechi, fays he, knew all that the writers before had faid of this faint; he knew this particular father's turn and character; and from thence judged, what he could choofe out of them, and what he would domit. Spence's Life of Magliabechi This paffage feems to poffefs every poffible fault. The fentences are conftructed in a very unfkilful manner; the circumftances are often improperly placed; and the members loofe and disjointed. Nothing is expreffed with energy; all is feeble and ungraceful. The commencement of the fecond paragraph prefents fo violent a feparation of correfponding words, that the period is involved in a confiderable degree of obfcurity. "Nor is the author's phrafeology lefs exceptionable: it is altogether low and vulgar, as the expreffions in Italics will fufficiently teftify. The laft fentence contains an inftance -Soft grammatical impropriety, which indeed is alfo to be found in many of our moft eminent writers. The adverb athence neceffarily includes the prepofition from in its fignifi cation it is therefore a folecifin to join both thefe words in the fame phrase. That, Mr. Spence fhould ever have been regarded as an elegant, author, appears to me a very furprizing circumftance.* He was, beyond all doubt, a molt amiable, and worthy character: but the merits of the man must not be transferred to his writings. Mr Hervey feems to have regarded Spence's Dialogue cn. Pope's Odyssey as a ftandard of perfection. By an anonymous writer of his life, it is faid, that "to this elegant and judicious difcourfe Mr. Hervey often acknowledged that he owed more of his s improvement in ftyle and compofition than to any other which he had ever read.” TH CHAP. XX. OF THE VEHEMENT STYLE. HE vehement rifes a degree above the nervous ftyle. The former, however, always includes the latter : for in order to attain to any vehemence of diction, an author muft neceffarily be poffeffed of ftrength. The vehement style is diftinguished by a peculiar ardou of expreffion; it is the language of a man whofe imagination and paffions are ftrongly affected by the fubject which he contemplates; and who is therefore negligent of leffer graces, but pours forth his eloquence with the fullness and rapidity of a torrent. It belongs to the higher fpecies of oratory; and indeed is rather expected from a man who declaims in a popular affembly, than from one who writes in the retirement of his clofet.. Of this kind of ftyle, the moft ftriking examples in our language has been exhibited by Burke and Bolingbroke. Burke was a man of the moft fplendid talents, and these talents had been fostered by due cultivation. He was poffeffed of a vigorous understanding, and of an imagination fervent and brilliant. His manly eloquence is almost unparalleled; it rolls along like a rapid and impetuous torrent, and bears down every object that rifes in oppofition. His illuftrations are copious and fplendid. He is even profufe of poetical imagery and poetical conceptions.* すべ In imagery, Burke is much more copious and variegated than Cicero. Superior copioufnefs, however, of imagery does not neceffarily imply fuperior fertility of imagination: the power of combination being equal, he will moft eafily combine who has the moft copious materials. If there be two men of equal powers of imagination, and the one knows hiftory and ethics, the other hiftory and ethics equally well, and phyfics befides, the latter may have with eafe more abundant imagery than the former. The fources of imagery are more numerous to the moderns, becaufe knowledge is greater. But when we particularly examine the imagery of - Bolingbroke was fitted by nature to be the demagogue of a popular affembly. The ftyle which runs through all his political writings, is that of a perfon declaiming with heat rather than writing with deliberation. He abounds with rhetorical figures; and pours himself forth with great impetuofity. He is copious to a fault; places the fame thought before us in many different views; but generally with vivacity or ardour. He is bold rather than correct.. His eloquence is a torrent that flows ftrong, but often muddy. Upon the whole, his merit as a writer would have been confiderable, if his matter had equalled his ftyle. But while we find much to commend in the latter, the former is entitled to no kind of praife. In his reafonings, he is for the most part flimfy and falfe; in his political writings factions; and in what he calls his philofophical ones, irreligi ous and fophiftical in the highest degree.t In treating of the vehement ftyle, I have not, as upon former occafions, attempted to felect examples. The fubject cannot in the prefent inftance be elucidated iu this manner. Vehemence of ftyle can only be perceived and relifhed by attending to a pretty long feries of reafonings and illuf trations. Cicero and of Burke, we find Burke's to be more abundant, not only from the ftores of modern difcovery and practice, but from thofe of external and moral nature, known in the time of Cicero, and at all times. Hence we may fairly infer, that the imagination of Burke was naturally more fer.tile than that of Cicero. Bisset's Life of Burke., † Chesterfield having mentioned Bolingbroke's Idea of a Patriot King, proceeds in the following manner: "I defire that you will read it over and over again, with particular attention to the ftyle, and to all thofe beauties of oratory with which it is adorned. Till I read that book, I confefs I did not know all the extent and powers of the English language. Lord Bolingbroke has both a tongue and a pen to perfuade: his manner of fpeaking in private converfation, is full as elegant as his writings; whatever fubject he either fpeaks or writes upon, he adorns with the most fplendid eloquence ; A CHAP. XXI. OF THE PLAIN STYLE. PLAIN ftyle is one that rejects all ambitious ornaments. The writer who adopts this manner, may perhaps endeavour to difplay his meaning with perfpicuity and precifion; qualities of ftyle which it muft be confeffed, are of the highest order. His compofition may alfo be poffeffed of force and vivácity. But he will fhew an indifference for what is merely ornamental. He does not strive to captivate the fancy or the ear by employing rhetorical figures, or mufical arrangement. Yet it is not neceffary, that he difguft his reader by a drynefs or harfhnefs of manner. A plain ftyle is confiftent with fmoothness of arrangement, and a temperate ufe of metaphor; though neither of thefe is abfolutely requisite. In difcuffions of a philofophical nature, the plain ftyle ought to predominate. And accordingly many of the Englifh philofophers have employed it with propriety. Even in works which admit, or require ever fo much ornament, there are parts where the plain manner fhould be adopted. But it inuft be remembered, that when this is the character which a writer affects throughout his whole compofition, great weight of matter, and great force of fentiment, are required not a flodied or laboured eloquence, but fuch a flowing happinefs of diction, which, (from care perhaps at firft) is become fo habitual to him, that even his moft familiar converfations, if taken down in writing, would bear the prefs, without the leaft correction either as to method or ftyle. If his conduct in the former part of his life, had been equal to his natural and acquired talents, he would moft justly have merited the epithet of all-accomplished." Chesterfield's Letters to his Son, letter clxxv. Dr Hurd fpeaking of the work which is fo much extolled in this paffage, pronounces it a contemptible pamphlet.(Hurd's Life of Warburton.) Each of thefe writers may have reafon on his fide: Chesterfield fpeaks of its style, and Hurd undoubtedly refers to its matter. to keep up the reader's attention. Unlefs he happens to treat of mathematical fubjects, an author ought always to beware of falling into a drynefs of manner. This excludes ornaments of every defcription. Content with being understood, it has not the leaft aim to please either the fancy or the ear. Ariftotle furnishes the most complete example of a dry ftyle. Never perhaps was there an author who adhered fo rigidly to the strictness of a didactic manner throughout all his writings, and conveyed fo much inftruction without the least approach to ornament, With the most profound genius, and the most extenfive views, he writes like a pure intelligence, who addreffes himself folely to the understanding, without making any ufe of the channel of the imagination. But this is a manner which deferves not to be imitated. For although the value of the matter may compenfate for the drynefs or harshness of the ftyle, yet is that drynefs a confiderable defect. It fatigues the attention, and conveys our fentiments with difadvantage to the reader or hearer. It would appear, however, that Ariftotle wrote in this manner from choice rather than neceffity. Had he preferred a more ornamental ftyle, he could undoubtedly have attained it. It is even the opinion of fome learned men, that if we may judge from the fpecimen which ftill remains,* he was fitted by nature to excel in the higher fpecies of poetry... Scaliger regards his Hymn to Virtue as not inferior to the compofitions of Pindar.† Dr. Swift may be placed at the head of thofe who have employed the plain ftyle. Few writers have difcovered: greater talents. He always fhows himfelf completely master of the fubject of which he treats. Few were better acquainted with the extent, the purity, the precifion of the English. language and therefore, to thofe who are ambiticus of attaining a pure and correct flyle, he is one of the most useful models. But we must not look for much ornament or grace in his language. His haughty and morofe genius made him. defpife any embellishment of that kind as beneath his dignity. He delivers his fentiments in a plain, pofitive manner, like * Apud Athenaum, lib. xv. chap. 16, Stobaum, prope init. et Diogenem Laertium in vita Ariftotelis. t. |