1810.] ON THE UTILITY OF CLASSICAL LEARNING.

proportionate. Warm and constant in his attachments, he was naturally inclined to vehemence in his resentments. When he conquered this propensity, it was the triumph of principle; not so much a compliance with the dictate of philosophy, as obedience to Christianity. He had uncommon talents for sarcastick composition; but though he indulged his inclination for this in former periods of his life, he declared in old age that he sincerely repented of it; thinking it immoral and unchristian to delight in wounding the feelings of others. His discrimination of character partook of severity. Merit instantly commanded his esteem, and misery his assistance; but for pertinacious folly and vice he had no relentings. Feeling his own strength, he sometimes seemed for a moment to forget the weakness of others. This he considered as a de

fect in his character, and mentioned it with regret.

He died from natural decay, in the eighty-fifth year of his age, having long expected the event. By his last will he gave many charitable legacies, the most considerable of which is five thousand dollars to Harvard university for promoting biblical criticism.

Probably it may be thought that the foregoing sketches exhibit more of the fidelity of history, than the partiality of eulogy. Such has been the intent of the writer; for he knows that the venerable departed would frown on fulsome panegyrick. All the excellence of man is imperfect, and every just picture of it must be shaded. When merit is abundant, it is enough that errors are few, chastened by principle, and such as seem naturally associated with human greatness and virtue.

REMARKS ON THE UTILITY OF CLASSICAL LEARNING.

(Concluded from page 376, vol. viii.)

IV. THE fourth and last objection to the study of Latin and Greek, "That the classick authors contain descriptions and doctrines, that tend to seduce the understanding, and corrupt the heart," is unhappily founded in truth. And indeed, in most languages there are too many books liable to this cenAnd, though a melancholy truth, it is however true, that a young man, in his closet, and at a distance from bad example, if he has the misfortune to fall into a certain track of study which at present is not unfashionable, may debase his

sure.

understanding, corrupt his heart, and learn the rudiments of almost every depravation incident to human nature. But to effect this, the knowledge of modern tongues is alone sufficient. Immoral and impious, writing is one of those arts in which the moderns are confessedly superiour to the Greeks and Romans.

It does not appear, from what remains of their works, that any of the old philosophers ever went so far as some of the modern, in recommending irreligion and immorality. The Pagan theology is too absurd to lessen our reverence for the gospel; but some of our philosophers, as we are pleased to call them, have been labouring hard, and I fear not without success, to make mankind renounce all regard for religious truth, both natural and revealed. Jupiter and his kindred gods may pass for machines in an ancient epick poem ; but in a modern one they would be ridiculous, even in that capacity; a proof, that in spite of the enchanting strains wherein their achievements are celebrated, they have lost all credit and consideration in the world, and that the idolatrous fables of classical poetry can never more do any harm. From the scepticism of Pyrrho, and the atheism of Epicurus, what danger is now to be apprehended! The language of Empiricus, and the poetry of Lucretius, may claim attention; but the reasonings of both the one and the other are too childish to subvert any sound principle, or corrupt any good heart; and would probably have been forgotten or despised long ago, some worthy authors of these latter times had not taken pains to revive and recommend them. The parts of ancient science that are, and always have been, studied most, are the peripatetick and stoical systems; and these may undoubtedly be read, not only without danger, but even with great benefit both to the heart and to the understanding.

The finest treatises of pagan morality are indeed imperfect; but their authors are entitled to honour for a good intention, and for having done their best. Errour in that science, as well as in theology, though in us the effect of prejudice and pride, was generally in them the effect of ignorance and those of them, whose names are most renowned, and whose doctrines are best understood, as Socrates, Aristotle, Cicero, Seneca, Epictetus, and Antoninus, have probably done, and still may do, service to mankind, by the importance of their precepts, by their amiable pictures of particular virtues, and

by the pathetick admonitions and apposite examples and reasonings wherewith their morality is enforced. Love to their country; the parental, filial, and conjugal charities; resignation to the divine will; superiority to the evils of life, and to the gifts of fortune; the laws of justice, the rights of human nature; the dignity of temperance, the baseness of sensuality, the proper direction of fortitude, and a generous, candid, and friendly behaviour, are enjoined in their writings with a warmth of expression, and force of argument, which a Christian moralist might be proud to imitate. In a word, I think it may be affirmed with confidence, that the knowledge of ancient philosophy and history must contribute to the improvement of the human mind, but cannot now corrupt the heart or understanding of any person who is a friend to truth and virtue.

But what have you to say in vindication of the indecency of the ancient poets, of Aristophanes, Catullus, Ovid, Martial, Petronius, and even of Persius, Juvenal and Horace? Truly, not a word. I abandon every thing of that sort, whether modern or ancient, to the utmost vengeance of satire and criticism; and should rejoice to hear, that from the monuments of human wit all indecency were expunged for ever. Nor is there any circumstance that could attend such a purification, that would make me regret it. The immoral passages in most of the authors now mentioned are but few, and have neither elegance nor harmony to recommend them to any but profligates :—so strict is the connection between virtue and good taste; and so true it is, that want of decency will always in one degree or other betray want of sense. Horace, Persius, Martial, Catullus, and Ovid himself, might give up all their immoralities, without losing any of their wit :—and as to Aristophanes and Petronius, I have never been able to discover any thing in either, that might not be consigned to eternal oblivion, without the least detriment to literature. The latter, notwithstanding the name which he has, I know not how, acquired, is in every respect (with the reserve of a few tolerable verses scattered through his book) a vile writer; his style harsh and affected; and his argument such as can excite no emotion, in any mind not utterly depraved, but contempt and abhorrence. The wit and humour of the Athenian poet are now become almost invisible, and seem never to have been very conspicuous. The reception he met with in his

own time was probably owing to the licentiousness of his manners, and the virulence of his defamation, (qualities which have given a temporary name to more bad poets than one); and for his reputation in latter times, as a classick author, he must have been indebted, not to the poignancy of his wit, or -the delicacy of his humour, nor to his powers of invention and arrangement, nor to any natural display of human manners to be found in him, (for of all this merit he seems to be destitute), but solely to the antiquity of his language. In proof of one part of this remark, it may be observed, that Plato in his Symposium describes him as a glutton, drunkard, and profligate and to evince the probability of another part of it, I need only mention the excessive labour and zeal wherewith commentators have illustrated certain Greek and Latin performances, which if they had been written in our days, would never have been read, and which cannot boast of any excellence, either in the sentiment or composition.

But do you really think, that such mutilations of the old poets, as you seem to propose, can ever take place? Do you think, that the united authority of all the potentates on earth could annihilate, or consign to oblivion, those exceptionable passages ?—I do not but I think that those passages should never be explained, nor put in the hands of children. And sure, it is not necessary that they should. In some late editions of Horace, the impurities are omitted, and not so much left as a line of asterisks, to raise a boy's curiosity. By the attention of parents and teachers, might not all the poets usually read in schools be printed in the same manner? Might not children be informed, that, in order to become learned, it is necessary to read, not every Greek and Latin book, but those books only that may mend the heart, improve the taste, and enlarge the understanding? Might they not be made sensible of the importance of Bacon's aphorism, "That some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested?"—that is, as the noble author explains it, "That some are to be read only in parts; others to be read, but not curiously; and some few to be read wholly with diligence and attention ?" -a rule, which, if duly attended to, would greatly promote the advancement of true learning, and the pleasure and profit of the student. Might not a young man be taught to set a proper value on good compositions, and to entertain such contempt for the bad, as would secure

him against their influence? All this I cannot but think practicable, if those who superintend education would study to advance the moral as well as intellectual improvement of the scholar; and if teachers, translators, and commentators, would consider, that to explain dulness is foolish, and to illustrate obscenity criminal. And if all this were practised, we should have no reason to complain, of classical erudition, thatit has any tendency to seduce the understanding, or inflame the passions. In fact, its inflammatory and seductive qualities would never have been alarming, if commentators had thought more, and written less. But they were unhappily too wise to value any thing beyond the knowledge of old words. To have told them, that it is essential to all good writing to improve as well as inform, and to regulate the affections as well as amuse the fancy and enrich the memory; that wicked books can please none but worthless men,, who have no right to be pleased, and that their authors instead of praise deserve punishment ;-would have been to address them in a style, which with all their knowledge of the grammar and dictionary they could not have understood.*

* It must move the indignation of every person who is not an arrant bookworm, or abandoned debauchee, to observe how industriously Johannes Dousa, and others of that phlegmatick brotherhood, have expounded the indecencies of Greece and Rome, and dragged into light those abominations that ought to have remained in utter darkness for. ever.-Mons. Nodot, a critick of the last century, on occasion of having recovered, as he pretends, a part of an ancient manuscript, writes to Mons. Charpentier, Directeur de l'academie Francoise, in the following terms. "J'ai fait, Monsieur, une decouverte tres-avantageuse a l'empire des lettres et pour ne pas tenir votre esprit en suspens, plein de la joye que je ressens moi-meme, je vous dirai avec precipitation, que j'ai entre mes mains ce qui manquoit de Vous pouvez croire, &c. Vous ap

Monsieur, si aimant cet auteur au point que je fais percevrez, Monsieur, dans cet ouvrage des beautès qui vous charmeront. Je vous prie d' annoncer cette decouverte a vos illustres Academiciens; elle merite bien, qu'ils la scachent des premiers. Je suis ravi que la fortune se soit servié de moi, pour rendre a la posterite un' ouvrage si precieux," &c. If the lost Decades of Livy had been recovered, this zealous Frenchman could hardly have expressed himself with more enthusiasm. What then will the reader think when he is told, that this wonderful accession to literature, was no other than Petronius Arbiter; an author, whom it is impossible to read without intense disgust, and whom, if he be ancient, (which is not certain), I scruple not to call a disgrace to antiquity?