按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
。。。
105
… Page 106…
THE MISCELLANEOUS WRITINGS AND SPEECHES OF LORD MACAULAY
ON THE ATHENIAN ORATORS。
（August 1824）
〃To the famous orators repair； Those ancient； whose resistless
eloquence Wielded at will that fierce democratie； Shook the arsenal； and
fulmined over Greece To Macedon and Artaxerxes' throne。〃Milton。
The celebrity of the great classical writers is confined within no limits；
except those which separate civilised from savage man。 Their works are
the common property of every polished nation。 They have furnished
subjects for the painter； and models for the poet。 In the minds of the
educated classes throughout Europe； their names are indissolubly
associated with the endearing recollections of childhood；the old school…
room；the dog…eared grammar；the first prize；the tears so often shed
and so quickly dried。 So great is the veneration with which they are
regarded； that even the editors and commentators who perform the lowest
menial offices to their memory； are considered； like the equerries and
chamberlains of sovereign princes； as entitled to a high rank in the table of
literary precedence。 It is； therefore； somewhat singular that their
productions should so rarely have been examined on just and
philosophical principles of criticism。
The ancient writers themselves afford us but little assistance。 When
they particularise； they are commonly trivial： when they would
generalise； they become indistinct。 An exception must； indeed； be made
in favour of Aristotle。 Both in analysis and in combination； that great
man was without a rival。 No philosopher has ever possessed； in an equal
degree； the talent either of separating established systems into their
primary elements； or of connecting detached phenomena in harmonious
systems。 He was the great fashioner of the intellectual chaos； he changed
its darkness into light； and its discord into order。 He brought to literary
researches the same vigour and amplitude of mind to which both physical
and metaphysical science are so greatly indebted。 His fundamental
principles of criticism are excellent。 To cite only a single instance：the
doctrine which he established； that poetry is an imitative art； when justly
106
… Page 107…
THE MISCELLANEOUS WRITINGS AND SPEECHES OF LORD MACAULAY
understood； is to the critic what the compass is to the navigator。 With it
he may venture upon the most extensive excursions。 Without it he must
creep cautiously along the coast； or lose himself in a trackless expanse；
and trust； at best； to the guidance of an occasional star。 It is a discovery
which changes a caprice into a science。
The general propositions of Aristotle are valuable。 But the merit of
the superstructure bears no proportion to that of the foundation。 This is
partly to be ascribed to the character of the philosopher； who； though
qualified to do all that could be done by the resolving and combining
powers of the understanding； seems not to have possessed much of
sensibility or imagination。 Partly； also； it may be attributed to the
deficiency of materials。 The great works of genius which then existed
were not either sufficiently numerous or sufficiently varied to enable any
man to form a perfect code of literature。 To require that a critic should
conceive classes of composition which had never existed； and then
investigate their principles； would be as unreasonable as the demand of
Nebuchadnezzar； who expected his magicians first to tell him his dream
and then to interpret it。
With all his deficiencies； Aristotle was the most enlightened and
profound critic of antiquity。 Dionysius was far from possessing the same
exquisite subtilty； or the same vast comprehension。 But he had access to
a much greater number of specimens； and he had devoted himself； as it
appears； more exclusively to the study of elegant literature。 His peculiar
judgments are of more value than his general principles。 He is only the
historian of literature。 Aristotle is its philosopher。
Quintilian applied to general literature the same principles by which he
had been accustomed to judge of the declamations of his pupils。 He
looks for nothing but rhetoric； and rhetoric not of the highest order。 He
speaks coldly of the incomparable works of Aeschylus。 He admires；
beyond expression； those inexhaustible mines of common…places； the
plays of Euripides。 He bestows a few vague words on the poetical
character of Homer。 He then proceeds to consider him merely as an
orator。 An orator Homer doubtless was； and a great orator。 But surely
nothing is more remarkable； in his admirable works； than the art with
107
… Page 108…
THE MISCELLANEOUS WRITINGS AND SPEECHES OF LORD MACAULAY
which his oratorical powers are made subservient to the purposes of poetry。
Nor can I think Quintilian a great critic in his own province。 Just as are
many of his remarks； beautiful as are many of his illustrations； we can
perpetually detect in his thoughts that flavour which the soil of despotism
generally communicates to all the fruits of genius。 Eloquence was； in his
time； little more than a condiment which served to stimulate in a despot
the jaded appetite for panegyric； an amusement for the travelled nobles
and the blue… stocking matrons of Rome。 It is； therefore； with him； rather
a sport than a war； it is a contest of foils； not of swords。 He appears to
think more of the grace of the attitude than of the direction and vigour of
the thrust。 It must be acknowledged； in justice to Quintilian； that this is
an error to which Cicero has too often given the sanction； both of his
precept and of his example。
Longinus seems to have had great sensibility； but little discrimination。
He gives us eloquent sentences； but no principles。 It was happily said
that Montesquieu ought to have changed the name of his book from
〃L'Esprit des Lois〃 to 〃L'Esprit sur les Lois〃。 In the same manner the
philosopher of Palmyra ought to have entitled his famous work； not
〃Longinus on the Sublime；〃 but 〃The Sublimities of Longinus。〃 The
origin of the sublime is one of the most curious and interesting subjects of
inquiry that can occupy the attention of a critic。 In our own country it
has been discussed； with great ability； and； I think； with very little success；
by Burke and Dugald Stuart。 Longinus dispenses himself from all
investigations of this nature； by telling his friend Terentianus that he
already knows everything that can be said upon the question。 It is to be
regretted that Terentianus did not impart some of his knowledge to his
instructor： for from Longinus we learn only that sublimity means height…
…or elevation。 （Akrotes kai exoche tis logon esti ta uoe。） This name； so
commodiously vague； is applied indifferently to the noble prayer of Ajax
in the Iliad； and to a passage of Plato about the human body； as full of
conceits as an ode of Cowley。 Having no fixed standard； Longinus is
right only by accident。 He is rather a fancier than a critic。
Modern writers have been prevented by many causes from supplying
the deficiencies of their classical predecessors。