The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Preface
• Key to Abbreviations and References
• Introduction
• 1.: The Manuscript
• 2.: The Lectures
• 3.: Considerations Concerning the First Formation of Languages
• 4.: Rhetoric and Literary Criticism
• 5.: System and Aesthetics
• Bibliographical Note
• Lectures On Rhetoric and Belles Lettres: Lecture 2D.
• Lecture 3D.: Of the Origin and Progress of Language 1
• Lecture 4tha
• Lecture 5. A
• Lecture 6.THA: Of What Is Called the Tropes and Figures of Speech. B
• Lecture. 7. A
• Lecture. 8. A
• Lecture. 9tha
• Lecture. 10tha
• Lecture. 11 a
• Lecture. 12.THA: Of Composition
• Lecture. 13 a
• | Lecture. 14 a
• Lecture 15tha
• Lecture. 16th. a
• Lecture XVII. A
• Lecture Xviii a
• Lecture. Xixth. a
• Lecture. XX.THA
• Lecture Xxist. a
• Lecture Xxiida
• Lecture Xxiiida
• Lecture Xxivtha
• Lecture XXV. A
• Lecture Xxvitha
• Lecture Xxvii a
• Lecture Xxviiitha
• Lecture Xxix a
• Lecture. Xxx a
• Considerations Concerning the First Formation of Languages,&c. &c.1
• Appendix 1 (see P. 32) the Bee, Or Literary Weekly Intelligencer, For Wednesday, May 11, 1791.
• Appendix 2 Table of Corresponding Passages

Lecture. 11 ^a

Wednesday. Dcr:

In ^b some of our former Lectures we have given a character of some of the best English Prose writers, and made comparisons betwixt their different manners. The Result of all which as well as the rules we have laid down is, that the perfection of stile consists in Express<ing> in the most concise, proper and precise manner the thought of the author, and that in the manner which best conveys the sentiment, passion or affection with which it affects or he pretends it does affect him and which he designs to communicate to his reader.

This you’ll say is no more than common sense, and indeed it is no more. But if you’ll attend to it all the Rules of Criticism and morality when traced to their foundation, turn out to be some Principles of Common Sence which every one assents to; all the business of those arts is to apply these Rules to the different subjects and shew what their conclusion ^c is when they are so applyed. ^d | 135 Tis for this purpose we have made these ^e observations on the authors above mentioned. We have shewn how fare they have acted agreably to that Rule, which is equally applicable to conversation and behaviour as writing. For what is that makes a man agreable company, is it not, when his sentiments appear to be naturally expressed, when the passion or affection is properly conveyed and when their thoughts are so agreable and naturall that we find ourselves inclined to give our assent to them. A wise man too in conversation and behaviour will not affect a character that is unnaturall to him; if he is grave he will not affect to be gay, nor if he be gay will he affect to be grave. ^f He will only regulate his naturall temper, restrain within just bounds ^g and lop all exhuberances and bring it to that pitch which will be agreable to those about him. But he will not affect such conduct as is unnaturall to his temper tho perhaps in the abstract they may be more to be wished.

| 136 In like manner what is that ^h is agreable in Stile; It is when all the thoughts are justly and properly expressed ⁱ in such a manner as shews the passion they affected the author with, and so that all seems naturall and easy. He never seems to act out of character but speaks in a manner not only suitable to the Subject but to the character he naturally inclines to.

The three authors we have alr<e>ady considered seem all to have acted agreably to this Rule. Every one speaks in his own stile and such an one as is agreable to his generall character. Hence we see there is a certain uniformity in their maner, there are no passages that remarkably distinguish themselves, ^j their admirers dont seem particularly fond of any one more than the rest, there are none which they get by heart | 137 and repeat with admiration as they would a piece of Poetry. ^k These authors did not attempt what they thought was the greatest perfection of stile but that perfection which they thought most suitable to their genius and temper.

But there is an other English ^l author who though much inferior to these three yet for the same reason as Thomson and others of that sort, had till very lately in this country a character much Superior to that of the others. The reason as we mentioned before was the ignorance of true propriety of language. I believe I need hardly mention that I mean Lord Shaftesbury.

This author seems not <at> all to have acted agreably to the Rule we have given above but to have formed to himself an idea of beauty of Stile abstracted from his | 138 own character, by which he proposed to regulate his Stile.

If we attend to the Character and circumstances of this nobleman we will easily perceive what it was which lead him to this Conduct. He was connected with a father and educated under a tutor, who have no ^m very strong affection to any particular sect or tenets in Religion, who cried up freedom of thought and [and] Liberty of Concience in all matters religious or philosophicall without being attached to any particular men or opinions. If these friends of his were ⁿ inclined to any one sect it was rather to the puritans than the established Church, as their tenets best suited with that Liberty of Concience they so strenuously maintained. Shaftesbury himself, by what we can learn from his Letters, 1 seems to have been of a very puny and weakly constitution, always | 139 ^o either under some disorder or in dread of falling into one. Such a habit of <body> is very much connected, nay almost continually attended by, a cast of mind in a good measure similar. Abstract reasoning and deep searches are too fatiguing for persons of this delicate frame. ^p Their feableness of body as well as mind hinders them from engaging in the pursuits which generally engross the common sort of men. Love and Ambition are too violent in their emotions to find ground to work upon in such frames; where the passions are not very strong. ^q The weakness of their appetites and passions hinders them from being carried away in the ordinary manner, they find no great difficulty in conforming their conduct to the Rules they have proposed to themselves.

| 140 ^r The fine arts, matters of taste and imagination, are what they are most inclined to cultivate. They require little labour and at the same time afford an entertainment very suitable to their ^s temper and abilities. Accordingly we find that Lord Shaftesbury tho no great reasoner, nor deeply skilled in the abstract sciences, had ^t a very neice and just taste in the fine arts and all matters of that sort. {We are told he made some figure as a speaker in bothe houses of Parliament 2 tho not very extraordinary, but we do not find that he was ever distinguished in debate or Deliberation in Politicall matters} Naturall philosophy he does not seem to have been at all acquainted with, 3 but on the other hand he shews a great ignorance of the advances it had then made and a contempt for its followers. The reason plainly is that it did not afford the amusement his disposition required and the mathematicall part particularly required | 141 more attention and abstract thought than men of his weakly habit are generally capable of. The pleasures of imagination as they are more easily acquired and of a very delicate nature are more agreable to them. {The contempt he expresses for such Studies is such as could proceed from no cause but very great ignorance}

Men of this Sort, when they take a religious turn are generally great enthysiasts, and much disposed to mysticall contemplations, on the being and nature of god, and his perfections, and such like topics. But the delicacy of his temper together with the plan of his education gave him a different turn. The scheme of Revealed religion which he was best acquainted with as we said was that of the puritans. The Grosness of their conduct, the little decency or appearance | 142 of devotion that they used in their manner of worship shocked his delicate and refined temper and ^u in time prejudized him against every scheme of revealed religion. The Selfish and confined systems of Hobbs and ^v could not agree with the delicacy of his Sentiments. The School philosophy was still less agreable. The futility, Sophistry, Barbarism and Meaness of their schemes was very visibl<e> and very disagreable to his turn of mind. This made him desirous of forming some system to himself more agreable to his own inclinations and temper. The intimate acquaintance which he had with the ancients and the great ^w knowledge he had early acquired in the ancient languages inclined ^x him to apply to them in this research. The system which of all others best suited his | 143 disposition was that of the Platonists. Their refined notions both in Theology and Philosophy were perfectly agreable to him, and accordingly his Philosophy and Theology is the same in effect with theirs but modernized a little and made somewhat more suitable to the taste then prevailing. In these he intermixes somewhat of the Philosophy of Hobbs and his precep<t>or Lockes. This latter as he was of a very different cast from his pupil so his philosophy did not suit with <him>, being too metaphysicall and not capable of affording him entertainment to his mind. But tho he endeavours to run down these philosophers yet he sometimes takes their assistance in forming his own plan.

| 144 {Such is Lord shaftesburys Undertaking to overturn the Old Systems of Religion and Philosophy as Hobbs before him had done but still more, ^y which Hobbs never had attempted to do, to erect a new one. Let us see how he has executed it, in what Stile and manner} ^z

Such is the subject of Lord Shaftesbury’s writings; Let us next consider how far his Stile ^a is suitable to the same character that lead him to this Scheme of Philosophy.

His weakly state of body as it prevented the violence of his passions, did not incline him greatly to be of any particular ^b temper to any great height. His Stile therefore would not be naturally more of one Sort than another. As therefore he was not lead to have any particular Stile, by the prevalence of any particular inclination, it was natural for him to form some Model or Idea of perfection which he should always have in view. {His Letters where we should expect to meet with some distinguishing marks of the character of the man more than in his other writings, are not near so animated as those of Swift and Pope or Ciceros ^c and the noble Romans who corresponded with him. The<y> are indeed full of what we call here sentiments (that is morall observations) but have no marks of the circumstances the writer was in at the time he wrote. Nor any reflections peculiarly suited to the times and circumstances.}

As he was of no great depth in Reasoning he would be glad to set off by the ornament of language what was deficient in matter. | 145 This with the refinement of his temper directed <him> to make choise of a pompous, grand and ornate Stile. His acquaintance with the ancients inclined him to imitate them; and if he had any one particularly in view it was Plato. As he copied him in his Theology and in a great measure in his philosophy so he seems to have copyed his Stile and manner also, tempering it in the same manner so as to make it more suitable to the times he lived in. Theocles in his Rhapsody 4 is exactly copied from Socrates. But as Socrates humour is often too coarse and his sarcasms too biting for this age he has softend him in this respect and made his | 146 Theocles altogether polite and his wit such as suits the character of a gentleman.

{He has indeed succeeded better in this attempt to form a stile than we could have expected and much better than any one could do in an attem<pt> to form a plan of behaviour. The writer may review and correct anything that is not suitable to the character he designs to maintain. But in Common life many accidents would occurr which would be apt to cause him loose his assumed character and if they are not immediately catched there is no remedy.

The character which a writer assumes he is not oblidged on any occasion to maintain without prymeditation, but many Incidents happen in common Life to which if the manners are not conformed in a moment the affectation will be betrayed} ^d

Polite dignity is the character he aimed at, and as this seems to be best supported by a grand and pompous diction that was the Stile he made choise of. This he carried so far that when the subject was far from being grand, his stile is as pompous as in the most sublime subjects.—The chief ornament of Language he studied was that of a uniform cadence and this he often does ^e in contradiction to precision and propriety, which are surely of greater consequence. {He has this so much in view that he often makes the one member of his sentence an echo to the other and often ^f brings in a whole string of Synonymes to make the members end uniformly.} ^g

{Socrates always in his longer discourses points out distinctly his transitions from one subject to an other. But as this looked too formal, he chose to do this by the more polite and easy manner of beginning a new paragraph, and he is at pains to tell us that he had reasons for his order even <tho> we ^h can perceive no connection.

This is the manner of making Transitions which has come so much in Vogue in Modern times; whatever advantages it may have in Elegance in perspicuity it falls short.

Socrates in Plato is always made to say: having considered this thing we are next to consider such another thing.}

In the Choise of his subject he ⁱ was allmost the same as Lucian. The design of both was to overthrow the present fabric of Theology and Philosophy but they differed in this: | 147 Lucian had no design of erecting an other in its place. Whereas Shaftesbury not only ^j designed to <destroy> the Structure but to build a new Aedifice of his own in its room. He judged, and indeed he judged rightly that this destruction would be easier accomplished and more to the taste of the times by riducule than by confutation. But even in those works where he designs to banter and laugh at his adversary he does it with the same ^k pompous diction as he uses in other works. By this means he hardly ever makes us laugh, only in two places in the whole characteristicks, one in the introduction to ^l and the other in his description of a match at football a little after. His Similles and metephors are often very ingenious but are spun out to such a | 148 <length> as is ^m tiresome both to himself and his readers {as that of the Indian.} In his Treatise where he ridicules Mr Hobbs there is not one passage which would make us laugh. Mr Hobbs book would make us laugh but his ridicule of it would never affect us. 5

{As all Copiators ⁿ exceed the Original, as a painting may be known to be a copy from being larger than that from which they are copies, so those who affect either in behaviour or in Stile carry their imitation too far. One who affects to be merry always laughs the loudest and longest of any in the company. In the same manner as Shaftesbury affects to be pompous, he often ^o exceeds and applies a grand diction to subjects of a very different kind. A Stranger who did not understand the language would imagine the most trivial subjects to <be> something very sublime from the manner and sound of his periods.}

This Nobleman ^p sometimes allows himself even to run into Burlesque, his Pompous Stile and humourous thoughts joined together make it almost unavoidable. But this species of Ridicule is always buffoonish and he surely falls greatly off from the Polite dignity he studies to maintain, when he allows himself a species of wit that is greatly beneath the character of a gentleman.—Nay this strenuous advocate for the re<finement> and justness of thought even condescends now and then to make use of a pun and those of the silliest kind as where ^q .

| v.148 {When Shaftesbury is disposed to be in a Rapture it is always unbounded, overstretcht and unsupported by the appearance of Reason, as for instance in his address to the Sun in his Rhapsody 6 in which address not one Circumstan<c>e is mentioned which ought to excite Rationall Admiration. Compare this with the Most Rapturous Passage in all Virgil, his Encomion on Rurall Life in the Georgicks. 7

• O Fortunati nimium sua si bona norunt
• Agricolae etc. etc.

Here every circumstance, every word, has an energy and force in displaying the felicity of the Country and Deprecating the Tinsel and Tumult of a Town Life. Virgil when he is disposed to be in a transport does not run mad} ^r

[a]MS 10; the date must be 15 December

[b]MS Ino

[c]replaces effect

[d]134 is blank

[e]use of the wri deleted

[f]replaces gay, in Hand B

[g]last four words replace curb in impetuosity

[h]last six words replace But as their are not natur

[i]with deleted

[j]non whi deleted

[k]They deleted

[l]Hand B(?) wrote no above English

[m]particular deleted

[n]any wise deleted

[1 ]Shaftesbury’s letters were published in 1716 and 1721.

[o]particular character which he always deleted

[p]And as deleted

[q]and deleted

[r]v. 139 makes false start: The fine arts and matters of taste and imagination are w

[s]way deleted

[t]yet deleted

[2 ]He was member for Poole 1695–8. In the House of Lords he ardently supported the Whig cause, and despite illness attended the partition treaty debate, travelling from Somerset in one day at Lord Somers’s summons. Alone he urged dissolution in the last year of William’s reign. He was the author of the anonymous Paradoxes of State relative to the present juncture . . . chiefly grounded on His Majesty’s princely, pious and most gracious speech [i.e. on 31 Dec. 1701] (1702).

[3 ]That Shaftesbury’s failure to keep up with recent advances in Natural Philosophy was criticised by Smith will not surprise readers of the latter’s Letter to the Edinburgh Review of 1756 (EPS 242–54).

[u]in deleted

[v]blank of five letters in MS (The reference is probably to Locke, Shaftesbury’s ‘preceptor’).

[w]mastery he deleted

[x]replaces lead

[y]to deleted

[z]Hand B

[a]and deleted

[b]Shape deleted

[c]Corres deleted

[4 ]The Moralists, a Philosophical Rhapsody (1709), Treatise v in Characteristicks (1711).

[d]the last two paragraphs He has . . . betrayed begin on v.144 opposite grand and ornate Stile; the second paragraph is in Hand B

[e]when deleted

[f]makes deleted

[g]on v.145 interpolations see Introduction, p. 5

[h]changed from tho

[i]has deleted

[j]judged deleted

[k]gravity and [blank] as wh deleted

[l]blank of ten letters in MS

[m]tediou deleted

[5 ]Miscellaneous Reflections, I.i. (Characteristicks, Treatise vi, 1711). Ibid. I.ii, philosophical controversy compared to a football match. Ibid. V.iii, the Indian. The Moralists, II.iv, ridicule of Hobbes; cf. III.i, and Sensus Communis: An Essay on the freedom of Wit and Humour (1709), Treatise ii in Characteristicks, II.i.

[n]changed from Copyators

[o]appli deleted

[p]This Nobleman replaces He even

[q]blank of six letters in MS

[6 ]The Moralists, III.i.

[7 ]Georgics, ii.458–9: read ‘O fortunatos . . . norint / Agricolas’.

[r]Hand B