B. What think you then of those Poems that were made in Praife of antient Heroes? HOMER has his ACHILLES; and VIRGIL, hisÆNEAS. Will you -condemn thefe two Poets? A. By no means, Sir: Dò but examin the Defign of their Works. In the Iliad, ACHILLES is the chief Hero, but his Praise is not the main End of the Poem. His Character is faithfully drawn with all its Defects: nay * thefe very Defects are a part of that Inftruction which the Poet defign'd to convey to Pofterity. The great † Defign of this Work was to infpire the Greeks with the Love of warlike Glory; and a dread of Difcord, as the -greatest Obftacle to Succefs. This mo-ral Inftruction is plainly interwoven throughout the Poem. The Odyfee indeed reprefents, in || ULYSSES, a Hero more regular, and more accomplish't: but this is till natural. For, of course, a D. 2 Man x Impiger, iracundus, inexorabilis, 'açer":" Trojani belli fcriptorem, maxime Lolli, Dum tu declamas Roma, Pranefte relegi: Ibid. Man like ULYSSES, whofe chief Character is Wisdom, must be more wary, and uniform in his Conduct, than fuch a rough, warm, forward Youth as ACHILLES. So that in drawing both these Heroes, HOMER feems only to have copy'd Nature. In fine, throughout the Odyffee we find innumerable Inftructions for the whole Conduct of Life: And one cannot but observe that the Poet's Defign, in describing a prudent Man, whofe Wisdom makes him always fuccessful, was, to fhew Posterity what good Effects might be expected from prudent Piety, and a regular Life. VIRGIL, in his Eneid, has imitated the Odyffee in his Hero's Character; and has drawn him brave, moderate, pious, and fteddy. But it is evident that the Praife of AN EAS was not the Poet's principal Aim. That Hero was defign'd to represent the † Roman People, who defcended from him: and VIRGIL mean't to fhew them that their Extraction was Divine; that the Gods had deftin'd them to govern the World: and by this he animated them to the Practice of fuch heroick Virtues as might fupport the Glory defign'd * Rex erat Æneas nobis, quo juftior alter defign'd for them. Now a Heathen cou'd not poffibly devife a nobler Moral than this. The only Fault of which VIRGIL can be fufpected, is his having had his private Interest too much in view; and his turning his excellent Poem to the * Praise of AUGUSTUS, and his Family, with too great an Air of Flattery. But we ought not to criticize any Author too feverely. B. But will you not allow a Poet, or an Orator to feek his Fortune in an honourable Way? A. After this useful Digreffion concerning Panegyricks, we now return to the Difficulty you propos'd. The Question is, whether an Orator ought to be intirely difinterested? B. I don't think that he ought: for this wou'd over-turn the most common Maxims. * Huc, geminas huc flecte acies; hanc afpice Gentem Excudent alij fpirantia molliùs æra. Credo equidem, vivos ducent de marmore vultus; Defcribent radio ; & furgentia Sidera dicent: ENEID. lib. vj. A. In your Republick, wou'd you not have Orators oblig'd to the ftrictest Rules of Truth? Don't you own that they ought never to speak in publick, but in order to inftruct People; to reforin their Conduct; and strengthen the Laws? B. Yes. A. An Orator then fhou'd have nothing either to hope, or fear, from his Hearers, with regard to his own Interest. If you allow'd of ambitious mercenary Declaimers, do you think they wou'd oppofe all the foolish unruly Paffions of Men? If they themselves be fubject to Avarice, Ambition, Luxury, and fuch fhaineful Disorders; will they be able to cure others? If they feek after Wealth; can they be fit to difengage others from that mean Purfuit? I grant that a virtuous and difinterested Orator ought always to be fupply'd with the Conveniencies of Life: nor can he ever want them, if he be a true Philofopher; I mean, fuch a wife and worthy Perfon as is fit to reform the Manners of Men: For then he will live after * Jam hoc quis non videt, maximam partem Orationis in tractatu æqui bonique confiftere Dicetne de his fecundum debitam rerum dignitatem malus atque iniquus? Denique demus id quod nullo modo fieri poteft, idem ingenij, ftudij, doctrinæ, peffimo, atque optimo Viro, uter melior dicetur Orator? Nimirùm qui homo quoque melior. Non igitur unquam malus idem homo, & perfectus Orator. QUINT. lib. xij. c. I. after a plain, modeft, frugal, laborious manner: He will have occafion but for little: and that little he will never want; tho' he shou'd earn it with his own hands. Now, what is fuperfluous ought not to be offer'd him as the Recompence of his publick Services: and indeed it is not worthy of his Acceptance. He may have Honour and Authority conferr'd on him: but if he be Mafter of his Paffions (as we fuppofe) and above selfish Views, he will ufe this Authority only for the publick Good; and be ready to refign it, when he can no longer enjoy it without Flattery, or Diffimulation. In fhort, an Orator cannot be fit to perfuade People, unless he be inflexibly upright: For, without this fteddy Virtue, his Talents and Address wou'd, like a mortal Poison, infect and destroy the Body-politick. For this Reason, CICERO thought that Vir D 4 tue *Eft enim Eloquentia una quædam de fummis virtutibus ---- quæ quo major eft vis, hoc eft magis P R oBITATE jungenda, fummaque PRUDENTIA; quarum virtutum expertibus fi dicendi copiam tradiderimus, non eos quidem Oratores effecerimus; fed furentibus quæ dam arma dederimus. De Orat. lib. iij. §. 14. Ad Sit ergo nobis Orator quem inftituimus is, qui a M. Cicerone finitur, VIR BONUS dicendi peritus de quod ne ftudio quidem operis pulcherrimi vacare mens, nifi omnibus vitiis libera, poteft ----- Quid putamus facturas cupiditatem, avaritiam, invidiam? quarum impotentiffimæ cogitationes, fomnos etiam ipfos, & illa per quietem vifa, perturbent. Nihil eft enim tam Occupatum, tam multiforme, tot ac tam variis affectibus concifum atque laceratum, quam mala mens QUINT. lib. xij. cap.1. |