Livy and Tacitus paint in very different ways. The descriptions of Livy are full, plain, and natural; those of Tacitus are short and bold.

Que embellishment, which the moderns have laid aside, was employed by the ancients. They put orations into the mouths of celebrated personages. By these they diversified their history, and conveyed both moral and political instruction. Thucydides was the first, who adopted this method; and the orations, with which his history abounds, are valuable remains of antiquity. It is doubtful, however, whether this embellishment should be allowed to the historian; for they form a mixture, unnatural to history, of truth and fiction. The moderns are more chaste, when on great occasions, the historian delivers in his own person, the sentiments and reasonings of opposite parties.

Another splendid embellishment of history is the delineation of characters. These are con sidered,as exhibitions of fine writing, and hence the difficulty of excelling in this province. For characters may be too shining and laboured. The accomplished historian avoids here to dazzle too much. He is solicitous to give the resemblance in a style equally removed from meanness and affectation. He studies the grandeur of simplicity.

ry.

Sound morality should always reign in histoA historian should ever show himself on the side of virtue. It is not, however, his province, to deliver moral instructions in a formal manner. He should excite indignation against the designing and the vicious; and by appeals to the passions, he will not only improve his

reader, but take away from the natural coolness of historical narration.

In modern times, historical genius has shone most in Italy. Acuteness, political sagacity, and wisdom, are all conspicuous in Machiavel, Guicciardin, Davila, Bentivoglio, and Father Paul. In Great Britain, history has been fashionable only a few years. For though Clarendon and Burnet are considerable historians, they are inferior to Hume, Robertson, and Gibbon.

The inferior kinds of historical composition, are annals, memoirs, and lives. Annals are a collection of facts in chronological order; and the properties of an annalist are fidelity, and distinctness. Memoirs are a species of composition, in which an author pretends not to give a complete detail of facts, but only to record what he himself knew, or was concerned in, or what illustrates the conduct of some person, or some transaction, which he chooses for his subject. It is not therefore, expected of such a writer, that he possess the same profound research, and those superior talents, which are requisite in a historian. It is chiefly required of him, that he be sprightly and interesting. The French, during two centuries, have poured forth a flood of memoirs; the most of which are little more than agreeable trifles. We must, however,except from this censure, the memoirs of the Cardinal de Retz, and those of the Duke of Sully. The former join to a lively narrative, great knowledge of human nature. The latter deserve very particular praise. They approach to the usefulness and dignity of legitimate his

tory. They are full of virtue and good sense; and are well calculated to form both the heads and hearts of those who are designed for public business, and high stations in the world.

Biography is a very useful kind of composi tlon; less stately than history; but perhaps not less instructive. It affords full opportunity of displaying the characters of eminent men, and of entering into a thorough acquaintance with them. In this kind of writing, Plutarch excels; but his matter is better than his manner; he has no peculiar beauty nor elegance. His judgment and accuracy also are sometimes taxed. But he is a very humane writer, and fond of displaying great men in the gentle lights of retirement.

Before we conclude this subject, it is proper to observe, that of late years, a great improvement has been introduced into historical composition. More particular attention than formerly, has been given to laws, customs, commerce, religion, literature, and to every thing that shows the spirit and genius of nations. It

is now conceived, that a historian ought to illustrate manners, as well as facts and events. Whatever displays the state of mankind in different periods; whatever illustrates the progress of the human mind, is more useful than details of sieges and battles.

PHILOSOPHICAL WRITING & DIALOGUE.

OF philosophy the professed design is instruction. With the philosopher, therefore, style,

form, and dress are inferior objects. But they must not be wholly neglected. The same

truths and reasonings, delivered with elegance, will strike more than in a dull and dry manner.

Beyond mere perspicuity, the strictest precision and accuracy are required in a philosophical writer; and these qualities may be possessed without dryness. Philosophical writing admits a polished, neat, and elegant style. It admits the calm figures of speech; but rejects, whatever is florid and tumid. Plato and Cicero have left philosophical treatises, composed with much elegance and beauty. Seneca is too fond of an affected, brilliant, sparkling manner, Locke's Treatise on Human Understanding, is a model of a clear and distinct philosophical style. In the writings of Shaftsbury, on the other hand,philosophy is dressed up with too much ornament and finery.

Among the ancients, philosophical writing often assumed the form of dialogue. Plato is eminent for the beauty of his dialogues. In richness of imagination, no philosophic writer, ancient or modern, is equal to him. His only fault is the excessive fertility of his imagination, which sometimes obscures his judgment, and frequently carries bim into allegory, fiction, enthusiasm, and the airy regions of mystical theology. Cicero's dialogues are not so spirited and characteristical as those of Plato. They are however,agreeable,and well supported; and show us conversation, carried on among some principal persons of ancient Rome, with freedom, good breeding, and dignity. Of the light and humorous dialogue, Lucian is a model; and

he hasbeen imitated by several modern writers. Fontenelle has written dialogues, which are sprightly and agreeable; but his characters, whoever his personages be, all become Frenchmen. The divine dialogues of Dr. Henry More, amid the academic stiffness of the age, are often remarkable for character and vivacity Bishop Berkley's dialogues are abstract, yet perspic

uous.

EPISTOLARY WRITING.

IN epistolary writing we expect ease and samiliarity; and much of its charm depends on its introducing us into some acquaintance with the writer. Its fundamental requisites, are nature and simplicity, sprightliness and wit. The style of letters, like that of conversation, should flow easily. It ought to be neat and correct, but no more. Cicero's epistles are the most valuable collection of letters, extant, in any language. They are composed with purity and elegance, but without the least affectation. Several letters of Lord Bolingbroke and of Bishop Atterbury are masterly. In those of Pope there is generally too much study; and his letters to ladies,in particular, are full of affectation. Those of Swift and Arbuthnot, are written with ease and simplicity. Of a familiar correspondence, the most accomplished model, are the letters of Madame de Sevigne. They are easy, varied, lively and beautiful. The letters of Lady Mary Wortley Montague, are perhaps more agreea-.