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 XXII^da

Monday Jan.^ry 17. 1763

Having now said all I think necessary concerning the two most simple methods of Writing, the Descriptive and Historicall, I might now proceed to the 3 Method viz. the Didactick, 1 but as the Rules concerning it are very obvious, I shall here pass it over and proceed immediately to consider the Oratoricall Stile.

Eloquence as I mention’d before was divided by the ancient<s> into three Sorts, 1^st The Demonstrative, 2^dly The Deliberative, 3^dly The Judiciall.—I shall begin with the Demonstrative as being most Simple and as the rules which ^b regard it are almost all applicable to the other two species of Eloquenc<e> and also because those rules which are to be given concerning it have least dependance on what I shall advance hereafter with regard to Didactic Etc. ^c

This Sort of Eloquence generally was directed to the Commendation of some Great man, which was given out to be the design of | 98 the Orator, tho’ as the name of Demonstrative or Paren ^d shows the Real design of the orator was to shew his own Eloquence. To maintain the Glory of the Person he commended was what he gave out to be his sole design in undertaking the work: But to raise his own glory was plainly the motive of his undertaking, as the Glory of the Person could not be very interesting either to the Orator or his hearers, as they were generally persons who had lived some ages before. {And this also will lead him ^e }

In treating of this Subject the following order shall be observed. In the 1^st Place I shall consider, I. The End Proposed in these orations. II^dly The means by which this may be brought about. III^dly The order in which those means are to be arranged. IV^ly The manner in which these are to be expressed: and V^thly Lastly what authors have most excelled in this Species of writing.

I^st As to the End proposd it will not be difficult to determine what this is | 99 to be. The nature of the Work plainly shews, that it is to Raise the Glory and Reputation of the Person commended. For tho’ the increase of his own fame may be the design of the Orator, and ge<ne>rally is so, Yet this is to be considered only as a secondary end. The Glory of the Person praised is the thing the orator is to have in view; and the other secondary ^f end is to be brought about only by acquitting himself handsomely in the principall design.

II^dly Of the means by which this end may be accomplished.—It is evident that there are but two ways in which a man ^g may be commended ^h , either 1^st by describing ⁱ his actions, or 2^dly By praising his character. The manner in which actions and characters are to be described have already been explained at some length and need not be here repeated. What we are here to aim at is to point out the actions and particular parts of a character that are most proper to be described | 100 in a discourse of this Sort. We may observe then that when a mans designs ^j have for the most part proved unfortunate, when he has been baffled in his chief and favourite Schemes, his actions are to be either passed over or but slightly touched, and the character or disposition of the man is chiefly to be insisted on. On the other hand if he has experienced a great flow of prosperity his actions are what we are chiefly to insist on. For as bad fortune is apt to give us a low and contemptible notion of a man tho’ he be of a very different cast; so good fortune has a great tendencey to attract our admiration and applause. But there is nothing which is more apt to raise our admiration and gain our applause, than the hardships one has undergone with firmness and constancy, especially if they have at last been surmounted. We are told by Shakespeare that Othello gained the Love of Desde| 101mona more by the difficulties he had encountered than by all his assiduities 2 .—We admire Ulysses ^k more for the great ha<r>dships he had to struggle with than if he had not been brought into such hazard. Uninterrupted prosperity does not ^l convey such a high Idea of the person who has experienced it, as if it had been intermixed with some Strokes of adversity. The 1^st seems more owing to chance, whereas the other demands all the attention and best endeavours of the Sufferer. {And as a tract ^m of adversity which ends well strikes us more than uninterrupted prosperity with admiration and respect, so a long course of Prosperity is weakend in our esteem by an unlucky or illguided conclusion. Thus Pompeys ⁿ Glory seems to be Tarnished by the Battle of Pharsalia 3 and that of Massinissa and Robert the Bruce} ^o .

{It is the stedfastness with which they have encountered dangers and opposed themselves to hazard which has gained men the character of heroes. The Heroes of Romance are all carried thro a series of disastrous adventures before they are brought to the happiness to which they are destined.— — — — —} Thus much with regard to the actions ^p .

As to the character that is most proper to be given of a man we would extoll it is evident at first sight that it must be a virtuous one. Virtue adds to every thing that is of itself commendable whereas Vice distracts from what would otherwise be praise worthy. But all virtues are not equally proper to give us a high and exalted Idea of him who is possessed of them, nor are all vices equally | 102 adapted to excite our contempt and dislike of the man who is guilty of them. Nay, the different virtues do not ^q claim our admiration in the proportion they bear to one another in the Scale of Virtue nor do all vices degrade in our opinion the person guilty of them ^r in the precise proportion we ^s should expect from the degree in which they are generally placed.

There are some virtues which excite or attract our respect and admiration and others which we love and esteem. {It would appear that as in externall objects the mind is pleased with two kinds, the great and the Beautifull, so also in these internall objects she discovers two species’s which affect her with delight, the Grand ^t and the amiable} There are in the same way some vices which we contemn and despise and others which we abominate and detest; and (as we said) these opinions do not always keep pace with one another. Fortitude is generally more admired and respected than humanity altho this latter ^u virtue is perhaps more loved and esteemed. And on the <other> ^v hand, Cowardice and want of Resolution are ^w more contemned and despised than | 103 cruelty and Inhumanity ^x , tho cruelty and Inhumanity are more detested and abhorred. Men generally are more desirous of being thought great than good, and are more afraid of being thought despicable than of being thought wicked. Divines have commonly ascribed this Inclination which prevails so much amongst men to the depravity of human nature; and Philosophers who have taken up the cause of our nature and endeavoured to clear her from this charge of depravity have for the most part denied this to be the case. But it would be easy to show were this a proper place, that there is no part of our nature which more evidently appears to be contrivd wisely and kindly to, or tends more to promote our happiness.

The Respectable Virtues are those which are most suited to a commendatory discourse where we would excite the admiration and wonder of the audience. For besides that (as we said) they are of themselves more commonly admired than the amiable ones. For those latter are often | 104 found connected with the contemptible vices. Thus good nature and humanity are frequently joined with timidity and want of resolution. And on the other hand those vices which most demean and d<e>grade one in the eyes of men are the contemptible ones; for those which we would ^y detest are as often found connected with the respectable virtues.

The Language of Admiration and wonder is that in which we naturally speak of the Respectable virtues. Amplicatives and Superlatives are the terms we commonly make use of to express our admiration and ^z respect. But this is not the Genuine and natural language of Love. There is none of the human passions which when it speaks as nature dictates is less apt to address its object in amplicative and magnifying expressions. The Romance writers of the middle age and others on Love subjects have indeed introduc’d those terms into their Love Language; but nature never expresses itself in that manner.

| 105 Diminutives and such–like are the terms in which we speak of objects we love. We are most <apt> to fondle Women and children and others whom we esteem of less capacity and worth than ourselves; and to these we never express ourselves in the superlative degree. ’Tis the Respectable virtues which ^a we find most generally ^b made use of in Panegyricks. In the Panegyricks of the Saints and Martyrs (a Species of writing very common in France) the patience, fortitude and magnanimity with which they endured the torments and cruel treatment inflicted on them is what they insist chiefly upon. The martyrs were those who in their own time drew most the attention of the people. Their virtues of patience, fortitude etc. made them be ^c more admird than the Saints themselves were for their humility and Resignation and Piety. And it is their praises which we see are most extolld, and discovered in the terms of the highest admiration. Such expressions do not at all | 106 suit with the other more amiable but not so respectable virtues. Flechier ^d has indeed made use of them in his panegerycks 4 on those Saints and their virtues of humility and Resignation; but they suit as ill to them and appear as Ridiculous as when Don Quixote applies them to his Lady Dulcinea del Toboso.

Thus much of the means whether actions or character by which a man may be praised ^e . We may observe that in generall the same Rules are applicable to those discourses which are intended to praise or extoll a nation as are applicable to those which are wrote in Praise of a single person, and this holds both of those already deliverd and those that are to follow.

We come now in the III^d Place to consider in what order those means are to be arranged in the discourse which we have here pointed out.—The character of a man is never very ^f striking nor makes any deep impression: It is a dull and lifeless thing taken merely by itself. It then only appears in | 107 perfection when it is called out into action. We are not then generally to begin our panegerick with a character of the man whose Reputation we are to raise; but are rather to begin with an account of his mere actions commencing from his birth and tracing them on in the order in which they happen’d. With ^g these as we go along we may intermix some of the more minute and Private actions of ^h the Person. The smallest circumstances, the most minute transactions of a great man are sought after with eagerness. Every thing that is created with Grandeur seems to be important. We watch the Sayings and catch the apothegms of the great ones with which we are infinitely pleased and are fond of every opportunity of using them altho we every day hear better from those of our intimate acquaintance which we let slip unheeded. Having thus as it were conjoind the Manners of describing a character made use of by ⁱ Theophrastus and La Bruyer, 5 we recapitulate (or tell over a 2^d time) the character of the person, in the | 108 manner of the Abbe Rhetz. This is precisely the method which Xenophon has followed in his Panegyrick on Agesilaus. 6 He begins from his birth and gives us an account of the more memorable events of his life. ^j He gives us also many particulars of his private life which tend to illustrate his character. And Concludes the whole by drawing a character of him in the Direct manner.

This may answer very well in most cases, but is not to be so strictly adhered to as not to be deserted when circumstances require it. If it should so happen that the most actions of a mans life had ended unhappily it would be very improper to introduce our panegyric with an account of them which would in effect be an account of his failings. We should rather in these circumstances give an account of his character illustrating the severall virtues with any facts that will admit of being introduced in that manner, concealing or at most slightly touching on those of a disastrous nature.

There are other circumstances also which may make it expedient to alter this method. Thus Cicero | 109 in the Manilian Oration, 7 where his design was to Recommend Pompey for the Commander in the Mithridatick war, does not give an account of his actions in the order they happen’d. But after having enumerated the requisites in a general who should command in that expedition, Shows that Pompey ^k possessed all those necessary qualifications; which <he> confirms by suitab<l>e actions taken from the different stages of his life without regard to the order of time. ^l This may suffice concerning the arangement.

It may be observed that there are some other circumstances which may afford matter to a panegyric besides those above enumerated: Thus if the Person be of a good family, noble ancestors etc. {or virtuous children and good} ^m these may be recorded, as well as his own qualifications; for everything that is connected with rank, nobility or Grandeur ⁿ receives a tincture from them and is looked on in that light by the generality of People.

IV Of the manner in which these are to be expressed. The Panegyrist will | 110 not as the Historian content himself with barely relating any fact ^o or affirming a proposition but will embellish the one with ornamentall declamations and go about to Prove the other by different methods. Thus Xenophon in the forementiond work not only affirms that Agesilaus conduct to Tissaphernes was the beginning and foundation of all his good actions, but also proves it by different methods.

[a]MS XXIt

[1 ]See i.151 above.

[b]replaces with

[c]In treating of this subject I shall observe the following method. I deleted

[d]blank of nine letters in MS (probably ‘Panegyrick’)

[e]blank of five letters in MS

[f]aim deleted by enclosing brackets

[g]replaces a character

[h]ord: inserted above; for ordinarily?

[i]replaces praising

[j]replaces actions

[2 ]Othello, I.iii.167–8:

• She lov’d me for the dangers I had pass’d;
• And I lov’d her that she did pity them.

[k]the deleted

[l]does not replaces appears

[m]replaces course

[n]character deleted

[3 ]The war between Pompey and Caesar with Pompey’s defeat at Pharsalus in 48 bc was a familiar subject in the 18th century, thanks largely to the popularity of Nicholas Rowe’s translation of Lucan’s epic the Bellum Civile (often mistakenly called the Pharsalia), published in 1718 and reaching a fifth edition by 1753.—On Bruce, cf. i.150 n.2 above; it is difficult to fill, for him, the blank, since the disasters of Dundalk (1318) and Edward II’s 1322 raids will hardly suffice. The same is true of Masinissa (c.240–148 bc) the Numidian who, by deserting the Carthaginians for alliance with Rome, aggrandised his kingdom and became its greatest monarch (Polybius xxxvi–xxxix).

[o]this interpolation by Hand A begins opposite brought into such hazard, (above) and ends Massinissa’s by, which Hand B deleted and squeezed that of Massinissa and Robert the Bruce into space above Hand A’s second interpolation It is . . . are destined (below); there is a space of five letters after Bruce

[p]sentence added later in space left in the line

[q]all deleted

[r]numbers written above change original order the person . . . opinion

[s]proportion we replaces degree they

[t]replaces great; the sentence is in Hand B

[u]MS letter

[v]on the should be followed by other; the scribe thought he had written othe, added r, and omitted other

[w]generally deleted

[x]and apparently deleted

[y]otherwise deleted

[z]este deleted

[a]replaces that

[b]MS generelly

[c]made them be replaces were

[d]inserted by Hand B in blank left

[4 ]Valentin–Esprit Fléchier (1632–1710), Bishop of Nimes from 1687: famous, like Bossuet, for his funeral orations, especially one for Turenne (see i.191 n.3 above).

[e]this sentence written small in one and a half lines which had been left blank

[f]replaces so

[g]replaces from

[h]our deleted

[i]the Abbe deleted

[5 ]On the Character see Introduction, p. 17, and i 191 above.

[6 ]In Scripta minora, LCL vii.60–133. The equivocal dealings of Agesilaus with his foe Tissaphernes, satrap of Lydia, touched on at the end of this lecture, are recorded at i.10–17, 29 and 35 in Xenophon.

[j]the deleted

[7 ]Pro lege Manilia, for the step taken by Gaius Manilius in putting Pompey in command of the campaign against Mithridates and Tigranes in 66bc.

[k]MS Pompess

[l]illegible word in minute writing (co Ciceros?) follows this sentence which is squeezed into a line left blank

[m]added by Hand B above the line

[n]com deleted

[o]replaces thing