furores impetit, seu Catilinam ex urbe furentem audacia, sce. lus anhelantem exterminat? Quid pictius aliquando? quid flo ridius quid dulcius? Sive enim circuitu verborum utitur, sive membratim, cæsimque dicit, sive hæc duo genera intermiscenda judicat, incredibili semper satiantur voluptate aures, ut nihil prorsus desiderent amplius. Pro Archia cum diceret, pro lege Manilia, pro Marcello, ut innumera sileam loca, nonne omnes rhetorum arculas, cuncta excussisse myrothecia videatur? Quis eo benevolentiam aptius aucupatur, diligentius judices docet, scientius attentionem conciliat? quis brevius narrat? quis lucidius? quis ornatius? quis magis eo scite disponit? quis potentius commovet? cui majorem reperias varietatem tot sales, facetiasque? tam venustum, tam politum, tam copiosum dictionis genus? Quis uno verbo hoc oratore dignior ut, judice Quinctiliano, jam Cicero non hominis sed eloquentiæ nomen habeatur. Sed quod Græcis in Literis frustra quæras, Latinæ ut proprium sibi vindicent, perfecit ipse Cicero, qui philosophiam facultatemque dicendi natura conjunctas, hominum deinde socordia separatas, miro artificio copulaverit. Neque enim satis habuit eloquentiam foro tantum et subselliis judicum et Curiæ parietibus contineri; liberam toto cœlo evagari jussit, reclusisque naturæ terminis, ad ipsum naturæ parentem ascendere et impervia nostris oculis, philosophia duce, perscrutari, quodque nullo in auctore reperias vel intricatissima tam facile tamque tractat eleganter, ut, illa dum legis, non inter philosophorum vepreta, sed in amoenissimis Pieridum hortis suaviter tibi deambulare videaris.

3. Sed inepte me fecisse animadverto, Auditores, qui voluptatem hanc maxime naturæ hominis consentaneam ab utilitate sejunxerim, quæ Latinis ex Literis percipiatur. In hasce enim transferri potest quod de uno Cicerone Fabius, voluptatem, quam ex illo quis caperet, magni esse profectus argumentum asserebat. Cujus quidem jucundæ utilitatis ea vis est, ut præ illa Socrates nihili omnino faceret vitam ipsam. Hic enim licet Delphici ora culi testimonio sapientissimus omnium judicatus, tanto tamen discendi ardore æstuabat, ut non semel, sed sæpe, si fieri posset, velle se mori affirmaret, quo colloqui sibi cum Orpheo, Museo, Hesiodo atque Homero liceret. Tantum tribuebat ille præclarorum doctrina hominum consuetudini. Nunc quid aliud agunt Lati næ Literæ, nisi ad beatam nos vitam adducunt, in qua non sąpientis modo alicujus dictum excipere, sed cum viris in omni doctrinæ genere excellentibus assidue vivere, cum illis philosophari, illorum præcepta exaudire, ac sapientia liceat illorum perpetuo frui? Idque eo facilius tutiusque quod quovis tempore nobis præsentes adsint, nobiscum rusticari ament, peregrinari non recusent, nostram non dedignentur inscitiam, divites vel potentes egenis inopibusve non anteferant, sola nobis ad eos diligentia aditum faciat, assiduitas vero vel retrusissima eorum sensa perspicere me

rcatur; quæque nobiscum communicant, tot cujusque retro seculi prudentium judicio comprobata cum sint, securi prorsus erroris ediscamus. Quod quanti sit, illi sane norunt,

Quos tetigit jactu certus ad ossa Deus.

Divitiæ enim inde nobis proveniunt quæ nec eripi valeant neque surripi, sapientia scilicet et eloquentia, quarum altera rationem, orationem altera cum perficiant, tanto illis sublimius supra vulgus ac turbam erigimur, quanto his distamus a brutis animantibus intervallo. Neque hæc dumi dissero, scriptores tantum loquor, Romanum qui nomen illustraverunt, sed illos etiam qui Romanos feliciter imitati, tot tantosque scientiæ thesauros tam eleganti ac nobili ornatos forma posteris tradidere. Quare omuibus Latine Literæ disciplinis sin necessariæ, at perquam utiles habendæ sunt. Hinc magua sibi agendi instrumenta, et laudis ornamenta comparant Medicina et Jurisprudentia, quarum prior, benefica et mitis facultas, salubritati corporum consulit, posterior vero societatem humani generis incolumem continet. Ex Literis Latinis sua ad munera instructiores fiunt Religionis divinique juris interpretes, iidemque Medici animorum. Ex ipsis Reges conditoresque legum Legem illam edocentur, quam Pindarus omnium mortalium et immortalium reginam non minus eleganter quam vere nominavit. At, inquiunt hic Latinitatis osores, vel ignavia nexi, perperam tantum illi operæ, tantum insumitur temporis, cum plerosque, ne dicam omnes, præcipuos in illa scriptores veruaculum in sermonem ab eruditis viris translatos esse videamus. Verum, ut omittam eos qui ingenio summopere valeant atque doctrina, aliorum scriptis, tamquam hederas parietibus adhærescentes, raro sese efferre, nisi, ut Tullius ipse, hac ad discendum exercitatione abutantur; hos autem ipsos hallucinatos sæpe esse, neque auctorum mentem assecutos; quis porro satis habeat tabellis suas ornare ædes, quas vel pingendi peritus descripserit, si queat ipse Raphaëlis, aliorumque primi ordinis pictorum, unde descriptæ illæ sint, exemplaria sibi comparare? Difficile suus constat præstantium virorum sententiis nitor et vis, quantocumque vel artificio vel conatu in vertendum quis incubuerit. Quam multas enim vero venustates sibi proprias vindicat Latina Lingua, quarum alias Hispana, Gallica alias, partim vero Italica, ejus filiæ, sortitæ cum sint, cunctas, idcirco suppeditare singulæ nequeant ad integram scripturæ quæ transferatur, formam referendam. Tot igitur tamque eximias majorum vestrorum imagines, Cives Lugdunenses, quas Latini vobis scriptores reliquere, non corporum quidem simulacra, sed animorum, sed consiliorum, sed virtutum mira cum arte expressas effigies et expolitas, larva inductas, hodiernisque quasi vestibus ementitas proponi vobis satis erit, quibus haud magno labore sui illas seculi cultu adornatas plena cum oblectatione fructuque pronum sit contemplari. Quin potius imitemini vestros illos Gallicarum Literarum cory

phæos, qui sane veterum scriptorum interpretibus haud suum accommodavere studium, sed assidua priorum lectione, qua potissimum continetur imitatio, eos pene ipsos, quum scriberent, effinxe runt? Num putatis Cornelium, Racinium, Molierium, Bossue tium, Fenelonium, num alios plurimos de quibus nulla umquam posteritas conticescet, alia potuisse via ad templum immortalitatis pervenire? Annon Ciceronis exemplum secuti potius sunt, qui non satis habuit magnorum virorum scripta, quæ Latina essent, memoriæ mandare, sed Græca insuper meditatus usque est, eorumque plurima ut Æschinis, Demosthenis, Xenophontis, Arati, Latinæ ad profectum Linguæ Latinis etiam verbis explicare non dubitavit ?

mus.

Quæ cum ita sint, ornatissimi Societatis Candidati, est mehercules cur magnopere gaudeamus id in animum induxisse parentes nostros, ut nos illa ætate, quum nullum homini judicium est, huicce tam amplæ, tam suavi, tamque utili Linguæ applicuerint; deinde hanc nobis Superos mentem indidisse, ut cum alii plurimi negli gendam putent, a nostris non eam curis iisque præcipuis excludaEjus enim vero tanta pulchritudo est ac tanta præstantia, ut, quod de Sapientia Plato, si oculis cerneretur, mirabiles non modo amores, sed reverentiæ sensus excitaret sui. Ea vero Latini sermonis copia ut ali ab eo ingenia, crescere, florere, et ad fructus quam uberrimos instrui summa quidam vir auctoritate putaverit. Sed præter cetera, quæ dicta a me sunt, duo debent nostros magis magisque nisus exaugere. Quæ fuerit hujusce nobilissimæ urbis origo, non inter vos modo, Cives Lugdunenses, sed inter cultas nationes esse qui ignoret, arbitror neminem. Hanc igitur cum in signiter huc usque probaveritis, fortissimos vos gerendo viros, optimosque cives, quæ duo, veluti propria Romanorum semper Cicero in eximia laude conjungit, quidni hoc etiam ad cetera urbis addendum ornamenta censeatis, ut non solum, rejecto ignarorum errore, scientiam mercaturæ, utpote illi utilissimam, Platonis, aliorumque philosophorum exemplo, societis, sed etiam tum reliqua Gallia, tum universa Europa ex Romani eloquii cultura haud minus quam ex aliis dotibus vos agnoscat posteros Romanorum. Deinde quod vehementi nobis sit ad hanc Linguam incitamento, hanc præivit viam sapientissimus Rex noster LUDOVICUS, qui cum ut omnia egregia et præclara, sic Latinas semper Literas, ut certa constansque fama prædicat, adamaverit, earum studia præcipuo cupiat opere promoveri. Quapropter mihi dubium non est quin Societatem hanc, Regia adeo conformem voluntati, fovere dignemini, amplissimi provinciæ civitatisque Præfecti ; vos vero, Cives Lugdunen ses, quibus per negotia ætatemque liceat, tanta eorundem fretos humanitate, et vestræ urbis amplitudini, proprio hoc vobis tuendo decore, consulturos, et augustissimi Regis nostri LUDOVICI vesti giis insistendo, vestro ipsorum honori inservituros esse confido. Dixi.

CRITIQUE ON OSSIAN'S TEMORA, Showing its great resemblance to the Poems of Homer, Virgil and Milton.

PART I.

I shall proceed to criticise the poem of Temora without any pre

vious comment: to show whether it was the work of an author of the name of Ossian, or of Mac Pherson, would lead to an endless discussion concerning a matter of little or no moment; it would be saying what has been so frequently said before; and it is likewise entirely foreign to my present purpose. Neither shall I argue that as a poem it is entitled to the appellation of epic; but certainly to maintain that Temora does not hold that high rank, is, as Addison has said of Milton's divine performance, merely to assert that Adam is not Æneas, nor Eve Helen.

Let us then examine the poem before us, according to the laws which have been laid down by Aristotle, and if upon such an enquiry it shall be found to be by no means imperfect either in the fable or characters, the sentiments or language, no one will then surely withhold from it that high degree of praise which it so justly merits.

Homer in his Odyssey has been compared by Longinus to the setting sun, who still retains his greatness, when the ardor of his rays is gone. Ossian in Temora is not unlike Homer in the Odyssey. He here possesses less fire than in Fingal, but he is more varied, more pathetic, and more magnificent; and displays more of that delicacy of sentiment, which to me is in many instances preferable to the fervor of a young poet. In every view we can take of him, he appears to advantage. His coincidence with the rules of the Roman critic is remarkably striking. He does not begin his poem with a cold recital of all the circumstances, which happened previous to the subject, which he particularly wishes to celebrate; but according to Horace's rule, and with a very superior degree of the poetic art, he dives at once into the midst of affairs. From his attention to matters of so trivial a nature, one would be led to suppose that the poem is of moderate date, and that the author had really studied the precepts of Aristotle. But our doubt upon the subject will vanish, and this circumstance will appear less remarkable, when we investigate the source from which the laws were drawn. Aristotle found that admiration of the highest nature was lavished upon Homer: and accordingly began to consider, what in reality it was that called forth this adiniration which he perceived was so justly bestowed. These laws, then, were drawn from Homer. Homer wrote after nature, and so did Ossian. And there can now remain no longer any wonder, that such a similarity should reign between two geniuses who copied the same great original.

The fable of an epic poem should be one, great and interesting.

Unity may be observed in all those sublime performances, which have so long continued to attract the attention, and command the approbation, of the learned world. The poems, however, of both Homer and Virgil have been thought deficient in this essential qua lity. Undoubtedly some of the episodes of their most excellent poems upon strict examination would be found to be excrescences. Milton, the chief of English poets, and at least second in merit, is not entirely free from blemishes of this kind. His episodes, on his loss of sight, on marriage, and a few other topics, can never be shown to have the slightest connexion with his subject; but still it must be allowed that they are errors, into which we would rather wish that he had fallen. Ossian in this respect, if not quite perfect, is nearly so, but should the unity of Temora not have been preserved in every small particular, we can show, if it is not in our power to defend him, that he is at least equal to those, who in former ages have carried off the palm.

The unity is more complete than that which arises from relating the exploits of a hero. It is a unity which lies in the subject. The event celebrated is the dethroning of a usurper, and the replacing of the proper heir upon the Irish throne. Every circumstance related in it seems to have a stronger connexion with the subject than another. Blair has remarked, in his criticism upon Fingal, that in that poem the unity of time and place is as apparent as the unity of subject. The remark is applicable to both the heroic poems of our author. Ossian's pensive and melancholy mind has in both given the preference to that season of the year" when the trees shake their dusky heads in the breeze." As it is autumn when the poem opens, so it is autumn when the poem ends. This was a season more peculiarly adapted to the circumstances of Temora. Fingal was in the last of his days, and all nature seems to fade with himi. Morlena of the streams is continued the scene of action throughout. It was here "that Oscar fell forward on his shield" at the feast of Cairbar, and it is where "the hundred streams of Morlena shone" that the last transaction in the poem was performed, the combat of Fingal and Cathmor. Whatever imperfections, in short, may be imputed to him, in whatever other respects he may be excelled, few will be found to surpass him in this greatest of all requisites to an heroic poem.

The episodes which are introduced are natural, interesting, and perhaps may be considered as the most finished pieces of Ossian. The bards, after the labors of the day were at an end, were employed to amuse their chief by the recital of glorious actions. The songs, which are introduced into the poem, are not pieces relative of any event which the poet may think proper, but have a reference either to the actor then spoken of, or to the action, which is related. In the sequel of the poem it is by means of these songs, that we are