fidered that, which is the bafis of all, that is to fay, in other words, the meaning of the fenfe. This led them at once into the moft curious of fubjects; the nature of man in general; the different characters of men, as they differ in rank or age; their reafon and their paffions; how the one was to be perfuaded, the others to be railed or calmed; the places or repofitories to which we may recur, when we want proper matter for any of thefe purposes. Beides all this, they ftudied fentiments and manners; what conftitutes a work; what, a whole and parts; what, the effence of probable, and even of natural Ection, as contributing to constitute a just dramatic fable. Harris.

168. PLATO, ARISTOTLE, THEOPHRASTUS, and other GREEK Authors of Philofophical Criticifm.

Much of this kind may be found in different parts of Plato. But Ariftotle, his difciple, who may be called the fyitemativer of his master's doctrines, has, in his tro treatifes of poetry and rhetoric, with fuch wonderful penetration developed every part of the fubject, that he may be juttly called the Father of Criticifm, both from the age when he lived, and from his truly tranfcendent genius. The criticifm which this capital writer taught, has fo intimate a correspondence and alliance with philofophy, that we can call it by no other me, than that of Philofophical Criticitim.

To Ariftotle fucceeded his difciple Theophraftus, who followed his master's exampie in the flady of criticifm, as may be teen in the catalogue of his writings, preferved by Diogenes Laertius. But all the critical works of Theophraftus, as well as of many others, are now loft. The principal authors of the kind now remaining in Greek, are Demetrius of Phalera, Dionyúas of Halicarnaffus, Dionyfius Longinus, together with Hermogenes, Aphthonius, And a few others.

Of these the most mafterly feems to be Demetrius, who was the earlieft, and who appears to follow the precepts, and even the text of Ariftotle, with far greater at tention than any of the reft. His examples, it must be confeffed, are fometimes obfcure, but this we rather impute to the defretive hand of time, which has prevented us from feeing many of the original authors.

Dionyfius of Halicarnaffus, the next in order, may be faid to have written with judgment upon the force of numerous compofition, not to mention other tracts on the fubject of oratory, and thofe alfo critical as well as hiftorical. Longinus, who was in time far later than thefe, feems principally to have had in view the paffions and the imagination, in the treating of which he has acquired a just applaufe, and expreffed himfelf with a dignity fuitable to the fubject. The rest of the Greek critics, though they have faid many useful things, have yet fo minutely multiplied the rules of art, and fo much confined themselves to the oratory of the tribunal, that they appear of no great fervice, as to good writing in general. Ibid.

$169. Philofophical Critics among the ROMANS.

Among the Romans, the first critic of note was Cicero; who, though far below Ariftotle in depth of philofophy, may be fail, like him, to have exceeded all his countrymen. As his celebrated treatife concerning the Orator is written in dialogue, where the fpeakers introduced are the greatest men of his nation, we have incidentally an elegant fample of those manners, and that politenefs, which were peculiar to the leading characters during the Roman commonwealth. There we may fee the behaviour of free and accomplithed men, before a bafer addrefs had set that standard, which has been too often taken for good breeding ever fince.

Next to Cicero came Horace; who often, in other parts of his writings, acts the critic and fcholar, but whole Art of Poetry is a standard of its kind, and too well known to need any encomium. After Horace arofe Quinctilian, Cicero's admirer and follower, who appears, by his works, not only learned and ingenious, but, what is still more, an honeft and a worthy man. He likewife dwells too much upon the oratory of the tribunal, a fact no way furprifing, when we confider the age in which he lived: an age when tyrannic government being the fashion of the times, that nobler fpecies of eloquence, I mean the popular and deliberative, was, with all things truly liberal, degenerated and funk. The later Latin rhetoricians there is no need to mention, as they little help to illuftrate the fubject in hand. I would only repeat, that the fpecies of criticism here

mentioned,

mentioned, as far at least as handled by the more able mafters, is that which we have denominated Criticifm Philofophical. Harris.

$170. Concerning the Progrefs of Criticijm in its jecond Species, the HistoricalGREEK and ROMAN Critics, by whom this Species of Criticifm was cultivated. As to the Criticifm already treated, we find it not confined to any one particular author, but containing general rules of art, either for judging or writing, confirmed by the example not of one author, but of many. But we know from experience, that, in procets of time, languages, cuftoms, mainers, laws, governments, and religions, infenfibly change. The Macedonian tyranny, after the fatal battle of Cheronea, wrought much of this kind in Greece: and the Roman tyranny, after the fatal battles of Pharfalia and Philippi, carried it throughout the known world. Hence, therefore, of things obiolete the names became obfolete allo; and authors, who in their own age were intelligible and eafy, in after days grew difficult and obfcure. Here then we behold the rife of a fecond race of critics, the tribe of icholiafts, commentators, and explainers.

Thefe naturally attached themselves to particular authors. Aritlarchus, Didymus, Euftathius, aud many others, beftowed their labours upon Homer; Proclus and Tzetz's upon Hefiod; the fame Proclus and Olympiodorus upon Plato; Simplicius, Ammonius, and Philoponus, upon Ariftotle; Ulpian upon Demofthenes; Macrobius and Afconius upon Cicero; Calliergus upon Theocritus; Donatus upon Terence; Servius upon Virgil; Acro and Porphyrio upon Horace; and fo with refpret to others, as well philofophers as prets and orators. To thefe fcholiafis may be added the feveral compofers of Lexicons; fuch as Hefychius, Philoxenus, Suidas, &c. alfo the writers upon Grammar, fuch as Apollonius, Prifcian, Sofipater, Charifius, &c. Now all thefe pains-taking men, confidered together, may be faid to have completed another fpecies of criticism, a fpecies which, in diftinction to the former, we call Criticifm Hiflorical.

And thus things continued, though in a declining way, till, after many a fevere and uniuccessful plunge, the Roman empire tunk through the welt of Europe. Latin then foon loit its purity; Greek they hardly knew; Claffics, and their Scho

liafts, were no longer ftudied; and an age fucceeded of legends and crufades.

Ibid.

§ 171. Moderns eminent in the two Species of Criticifm before mentioned, the Phi phical and the Historical-the laft Sort of Critics more numerous-tboje, mentioned is this Section, confined to the GREEK and LATIN Languages.

At length, after a long and barbarous period, when the fhades of monkery began to retire, and the light of humanity once again to dawn, the arts alfo of criticifm infenfibly revived. 'Tis true, indeed, the authors of the philofophical fort (I mean that which refpects the caufes and pritciples of good writing in general) were not many in number. However, of this rank, among the Italians, were Vida, and the elder Scaliger; among the French were Rapin, Bouhours, Boileau, together with Boffu, the most methodic and accurate of them all. In our own country, our nobility may be faid to have diftin. guished themfelves; Lord Rofcommon, in his Efay upon Tranflated Verfe; the Duke of Buckingham, in his Effay on Poetry; and Lord Shaftsbury, in his treatife called Advice to an Author: to whom may be added, our late admired genius, Pope, in his truly elegant poem, the Effay upon Criticism.

The Difcourfes of Sir Joshua Reynolds upon painting have, after a philofophic! manner, inveitigated the principles of an art, which no one in practice has better verified than himself.

We have mentioned thefe difcourfes, not only from their merit, but as they incidentally teach us, that to write well upon a liberal art, we muft write philofophically

that all the liberal arts in their principles are congenial--and that thefe principles, when traced to their common fource, are found all to terminate in the firft philofophy.

But to purfue our fubje&t-However fmall among moderns may be the number of theie Philofophical Critics, the writers of historical or explanatory criticism have been in a manner innumerable. To name, out of many, only a few-of Italy wer Beroaldus, Ficinus, Victorius, and Rober tellus; of the Higher and Lower Germany were Erafmus, Sylburgius, Le Clerc, and Fabricius; of France were Lambin, DuVall, Harduin, Capperonerius; of Ergland were Stanley (editor of Alchylu

Gatake

172. Compilers of Lexicons and Didionaries, and Authors upen Grammars. After Commentators and Editors, we mal not forget the compilers of Lexicons and Dictionaries, fuch as Charles and Henry Stevens, Favorinus, Conftantine, Lalaus, Cooper, Faber, Voffius, and thers. To thefe alfo we may add the authors upon Grammar; in which fub Jeet the learned Greeks, when they quitted ne Laft, led the way, Mofchopalus, Chry. floras, Lafcaris, Theodore Gaza; then in Italy, Laurentius Valla; in England, Grocin and Linacer; in Spain, Sanctius; in the Low Countries, Voflius; in France, Cafar Scaliger by his refidence, though by birth an Italian, together with those ble writers Meff. de Port Roial. Nor Cught we to omit the writers of Philological Epiftles, fuch as Emanuel Martin; nor the writers of Literary Catalogues (in French called Catalogues Raisonnées) fuch as the account of the manufcripts in the imperial library at Vienna, by Lambecius; er of the Arabic manufcripts in the Efcual library, by Michael Cafiri. Ibid. 173. Modern Critics of the Explanatory Kind, commenting modern Writers Lexicographers-Grammarians-Tranfla

tors.

Though much hiftorical explanation has been bestowed on the ancient Claffics, yet have the authors of our own country by no means been forgotten, having exer ciled many critics of learning and ingeRuity.

Mr. Thomas Warton (befides his fine edition of Theocritus) has given a curious butory of English Poetry during the midLe centuries; Mr. Tyrwhit, much accurate and diverfified erudition upon Chau

cer; Mr. Upton, a learned Comment on the Fairy Queen of Spenfer; Mr. Addifon, many polite and elegant Spectators on the Conduct and Beauties of the Paradife Loft; Dr. Warton, an Effay on the Genius and Writings of Pope, a work filled with fpeculations, in a tafte perfectly pure. The lovers of literature would not forgive me, were I to omit that ornament of her fex and country, the critic and patronefs of our illuftrious Shakespeare, Mrs. Montague. For the honour of criticifm, not only the divines already mentioned, but others alfo, of rank till fuperior, have hellowed their labours upon our capital poets (Shakespeare, Milton, Cowley, Pope) fufpending for a while their feverer ftudies, to relax in thefe regions of genius and imagi

nation.

'The Dictionaries of Minfhew, Skinner, Spelman, Sumner, Junius, and Johnfon, are all well known, and justly cíteemed. Such is the merit of the laft, that our language does not poffefs a more copious, learned, and valuable work. For grammatical knowledge we ought to mention with diftinction the learned prelate, Dr. Lowth, bishop of London; whofe adairable tract on the Grammar of the Eli language, every lover of that langure ought to ftudy and understand, if he would write, or even fpeak it, with purity and precision.

Let my countrymen too reflect, that in ftudying a work upon this fubject, they are not only ftudying a language in which it becomes them to be kaowing, but a language which can beat of as many good books as any among the living or modern languages of Europe. The writers, born and educated in a free country, have been left for years to their native freedom. Their pages have been never defiled with an index expurgatorius, nor their genius ever fhackled with the terrors of an inquifition.

May this invaluable privilege never be impaired either by the hand of power, or by licentious abufe!

Ibid.

men) unqualified perfons, I fhall enumerate oly a few, and thofe fuch as for their merits have been defervedly efteemed.

Of this number I may very truly reckon Meric Cafaubon, the tranflator of Marcus Antoninus; Mrs. Carter, the tranflator of Epictetus; and Mr. Sydenham, the tranf lator of many of Plato's Diniogues. All thefe feem to have accurately understood the original language from which they tranflated. But that is not all. The authors tranflated being philofophers, the tranflators appear to have ftudied the tyle of their philofophy, well knowing that in ancient Greece every feet of philofophy, like every fcience and art, had a language

tions.

To remedy thefe evils, a third fort of criticism arofe, and that was Criticifm Corrective. The bufinefs of this at firft was painfully to collate all the various copies of authority, and then, from amidst the variety of readings thus collected, to eftablith, by good reafons, either the true, or the most probable. In this fenfe we may call fuch criticifm not only corrective but authoritative.

As the number of the'e corruptions must needs have increased by length of time, hence it has happened that corrective criticifm has become much more neceffary in thefe later ages, than it was in others more ancient. Not but that even in ancient days various readings have been noted. Of this kind there are a multitude in the text of

*See Hermes, p. 269, 270.

Homer; a fact not fingular, when we confider his great antiquity. In the Conments of Ammonius and Philoponus upon Ariftotle, there is mention made of fereral in the text of that philofopher, which thefe his commentators compare and exa mine.

We find the fame in Aulus Gellius, as to the Roman authors; where it is withal remarkable, that, even in that early pe ricd, much ftrefs is laid upon the authority of ancient manufcripts, a reading in Ci cero being juftified from a copy made by his learned treed-man, Tiro: and a reading in Virgil's Georgics, from a book which had once belonged to Virgil's family.

But fince the revival of literature, to correct has been a bufinefs of much more latitude, having continually employed, for two centuries and a half, both the pains of the moft laborious, and the wits of the mot acute. Many of the learned men before enumerated were not only famous as hi torical critics, but as corrective alfo. Seca were the two Scaligers (of whom one has been already mentioned, § 171.) the tao Cafaubons, Salmofius, the Heinfi, G

vius, the Gronovii, Burman, Kuller, Wal, Bentley, Pearce, and Markland. Inte fame clafs, and in a rank highly eminent, I place Mr. Toupe of Cornwall, who, in his Emendations upon Suidas, and his edition of Longinus, has fhewn a critical acumen, and a compais of learning, that may jufty arrange him with the moft diftinguished fcholars. Nor muft I forget Dr. Taylor, refidentiary of St. Paul's, nor Mr. Upton, prebendary of Rochefter. The former, by his edition of Demofthenes, (as far as be lived to carry it) by his Lyfias, by is Comment on the Marmor Sandvicenfe, and other critical pieces; the latter, by his Latin, of Arrian's Epictetus (the firit of correct and elegant edition, in Greek and the kind that had any pretenfions to be called complete) have rendered themselves, as Scholars, lafting ornaments of their country. Thefe two valuable men were the friends of my youth; the companies of my focial, as well as my literary hours. I admired them for their erudition; I loved them for their virtues; they are now