XXXVII.

LECT. of them is, that the one perfonates the Author, a man of learning, no doubt, and of good prin ciples; and the other is a man of ftraw, fet up to propofe fome trivial objections: over which the first gains a most entire triumph, and leaves his fceptical antagonist at the end much humbled, and, generally, convinced of his error. This a very frigid and infipid manner of writing; the more fo, as it is an attempt toward fome thing, which we see the Author cannot fupport. It is the form, without the spirit of conversation. The Dialogue ferves no purpose, but to make aukward interruptions; and we should with more patience hear the Author continuing always to reafon himself, and to remove the objections that are made to his principles, than be troubled with the unmeaning appearance of two perfons, whom we fee to be in reality no more than one.

AMONG the Antients, Plato is eminent for the beauty of his Dialogues. The scenery, and the circumstances of many of them, are beautifully painted. The characters of the Sophifts, with whom Socrates difputed, are well drawn; a variety of perfonages are exhibited to us; we are introduced into a real converfation, often fupported with much life and fpirit, after the Socratic manner. For richness and beauty of imagination, no Philofophic Writer, Antient or Modern, is comparable to Plato. The only fault of his imagination is, fuch an excess of fertility as allows it fometimes to obfcure his judgment. It frequently carries him into Allegory, Fiction, Enthufiafm,

15

XXXVII.

Enthusiasm, and the airy regions of Myftical L É C T. Theology. The Philofopher is, at times, loft in the Poet. But whether we be edified with the matter or not, (and much edification he often affords,) we are always entertained with the manner; and left with a strong impreffion of the fublimity of the Author's genius.

CICERO'S Dialogues, or thofe recitals of con verfations which he has introduced into feveral of his Philofophical and Critical Works, are not fo fpirited, nor fo characteristical as thofe of Plato. Yet fome, as that " De Oratore" efpecially, are agreeable and well fupported. They fhew us converfation carried on among fome of the principal perfons of Ancient Rome, with freedom, good-breeding, and dignity. The Author of the elegant Dialogue "De Caufis Corruptæ Eloquentiæ," which is annexed fometimes to the works of Quinctilian, and fometimes to thofe of Tacitus, has happily imitated, perhaps has excelled Cicero, in this manner of writing.

LUCIAN is a Dialogue Writer of much emihence; though his fubjects are feldom fuch as can entitle him to be ranked among Philofophical Authors. He has given the model of the light and humorous Dialogue, and has carried it to great perfection. A character of levity, and at the fame time of wit and penetration, diftinguishes all his writings. His great object was, to expofe the follies of fuperstition, and the Pedantry

XXXVII.

LECT. Pedantry of Philofophy, which prevailed in his age; and he could not have taken any more fuccefsful method for this end, than what he has employed in his dialogues, efpecially in thofe of the Gods and of the Dead, which are full of pleafantry and fatire. In this invention of Dialogues of the Dead, he has been followed by feveral Modern Authors. Fontenelle, in particular, has given us Dialogues of this fort, which are fprightly and agreeable; but as for characters, whoever his perfonages be, they all become Frenchmen in his hands. Indeed few things in Compofition are more difficult, than in the courfe of a Moral Dialogue to exhibit characters properly distinguished. As calm converfation furnishes none of those affiftances for bringing characters into light, which the active scenes, and interefting fituations of the Drama, afford. Hence few Authors are eminent for Characteristical Dialogue on grave fubjects. One of the moft remarkable in the English Language, is a Writer of the laft age, Dr. Henry More, in his Divine Dialogues, relating to the foundations of Natural Religion. Though his Style be now in fome meafure obfolete, and his Speakers be marked with the Academic stiffness of thofe times, yet the Dialogue is animated by a variety of character and a sprightlinefs of Conversation, beyond what are commonly met with in Writings of this kind. Bishop Berkeley's Dialogues concerning the existence of matter, do not attempt any difplay of Characters; but furnish an inftance of a very abstract subject, rendered clear and intelligible

intelligible by means of Converfation properly L ECT. managed.

I PROCEED next to make fome obfervations on Epiftolary Writing: which poffeffes a kind of middle place between the ferious and amufing fpecies of Compofition. Epiftolary Writing appears, at firft view, to ftretch into a very wide field. For there is no fubject whatever, on which one may not convey his thoughts to the Public, in the form of a letter. Lord Shaftef

bury, for inftance, Mr. Harris, and feveral other Writers, have chosen to give this form to philofophical treatifes. But this is not fufficient to clafs fuch treatifes under the head of Epiftolary Compofition. Though they bear, in the titlepage, a Letter to a Friend, after the firft addrefs, the Friend difappears, and we fee that it is, in truth, the Public with whom the Author correfponds. Seneca's Epiftles are of this fort. There is no probability that they ever paffed in correfpondence as real letters. They are no other than mifcellaneous differtations on moral fubjects; which the Author, for his convenience, chofe to put into the epiftolary form. Even where one writes a real letter on fome formal topic, as of moral or religious confolation to a perfon under diftrefs, fuch as Sir William Temple has written to the Countefs of Effex on the death of her daughter, he is at liberty, on fuch occafions, to write wholly as a Divine or as a Philofopher, and to affume the ftyle and manner of one, without reprehenfion. We confider

the

XXXVII.

LEC T. the Author not as writing a Letter, but as comXXXVII. pofing a Difcourfe, fuited particularly to the circumftances of fome one perfon.

EPISTOLARY Writing becomes a diftinct species of compofition, fubject to the cognizance of Criticifm, only, or chiefly, when it is of the eafy and familiar kind; when it is converfation carried on upon paper, between two friends at a distance. Such an intercourfe, when well conducted, may, be rendered very agreeable to Readers of tafte. If the fubject of the letters be important, they will be the more valuable. Even though there fhould be nothing very confiderable in the fubject, yet if the spirit and turn of the correfpondence be agreeable; if they be written in a fprightly manner, and with native grace and eafe, they may fill be entertaining; more especially if there be any thing to intereft us, in the characters of those who write them. Hence the curiofity which the Public has always discovered, concerning the Letters of eminent perfons. We expect in them to difcoyer fomewhat of their real character. It is childish indeed to expect, that in Letters we are to find the whole heart of the Author unveiled. Conceaiment and difguife take place, more or lefs, in all human intercourfe. But ftill, as Letters from one friend to another make the nearest approach to converfation, we may expect to fee more of a character difplayed in thefe than in other productions, which are ftudied for public view. We please ourselves with beholding the