the miscellaneous writings and speeches-1-第28节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


e　excellent　rules　of　evidence　by　which　our　courts　of　law　are　regulated；the　introduction　of　extraneous　matter；the　reference　to　considerations　of　political　expediency　in　judicial　investigations；the　assertions；　without　proof；the　passionate　entreaties；the　furious　invectives；are　really　proofs　of　the　prudence　and　address　of　the　speakers。　　He　must　not　dwell　maliciously　on　arguments　or　phrases；　but　acquiesce　in　his　first　impressions。　　It　requires　repeated　perusal　and　reflection　to　decide　rightly　on　any　other　portion　of　literature。　　But　with　respect　to　works　of　which　the　merit　depends　on　their　instantaneous　effect　the　most　hasty　judgment　is　likely　to　be　best。

The　history　of　eloquence　at　Athens　is　remarkable。　　From　a　very　early　period　great　speakers　had　flourished　there。　　Pisistratus　and　Themistocles　are　said　to　have　owed　much　of　their　influence　to　their　talents　for　debate。　　We　learn；　with　more　certainty；　that　Pericles　was　distinguished　by　extraordinary　oratorical　powers。　The　substance　of　some　of　his　speeches　is　transmitted　to　us　by　Thucydides；　and　that　excellent　writer　has　doubtless　faithfully　reported　the　general　line　of　his　arguments。　　But　the　manner；　which　in　oratory　is　of　at　least　as　much　consequence　as　the　matter；　was　of　no　importance　to　his　narration。　　It　is　evident　that　he　has　not　attempted　to　preserve　it。　　Throughout　his　work；　every　speech　on　every　subject；　whatever　may　have　been　the　character　of　the　dialect　of　the　speaker；　is　in　exactly　the　same　form。　　The　grave　king　of　Sparta；　the　furious　demagogue　of　Athens；　the　general　encouraging　his　army；　the　captive　supplicating　for　his　life；　all　are　represented　as　speakers　in　one　unvaried　style；…　…a　style　moreover　wholly　unfit　for　oratorical　purposes。　　His　mode　of　reasoning　is　singularly　elliptical；in　reality　most　consecutive；yet　in　appearance　often　incoherent。　　His　meaning；　in　itself　sufficiently　perplexing；　is　compressed　into　the　fewest　possible　words。　　His　great　fondness　for　antithetical　expression　has　not　a　little　conduced　to　this　effect。　　Every　one　must　have　observed　how　much　more　the　sense　is　condensed　in　the　verses　of　Pope　and　his　imitators；　who　never　ventured　to　continue　the　same　clause　from　couplet　to　couplet；　than　in　those　of　poets　who　allow　themselves　that　license。　　Every　artificial　division；　which　is　strongly　marked；　and　which　frequently　recurs；　has　the　same　tendency。　　The　natural　and　perspicuous　expression　which　spontaneously　rises　to　the　mind　will　often　refuse　to　accommodate　itself　to　such　a　form。　　It　is　necessary　either　to　expand　it　into　weakness；　or　to　compress　it　into　almost　impenetrable　density。　The　latter　is　generally　the　choice　of　an　able　man；　and　was　assuredly　the　choice　of　Thucydides。

It　is　scarcely　necessary　to　say　that　such　speeches　could　never　have　been　delivered。　　They　are　perhaps　among　the　most　difficult　passages　in　the　Greek　language；　and　would　probably　have　been　scarcely　more　intelligible　to　an　Athenian　auditor　than　to　a　modern　reader。　　Their　obscurity　was　acknowledged　by　Cicero；　who　was　as　intimate　with　the　literature　and　language　of　Greece　as　the　most　accomplished　of　its　natives；　and　who　seems　to　have　held　a　respectable　rank　among　the　Greek　authors。　　Their　difficulty　to　a　modern　reader　lies；　not　in　the　words；　but　in　the　reasoning。　　A　dictionary　is　of　far　less　use　in　studying　them　than　a　clear　head　and　a　close　attention　to　the　context。　　They　are　valuable　to　the　scholar　as　displaying；　beyond　almost　any　other　compositions；　the　powers　of　the　finest　of　languages：　　they　are　valuable　to　the　philosopher　as　illustrating　the　morals　and　manners　of　a　most　interesting　age：　　they　abound　in　just　thought　and　energetic　expression。　　But　they　do　not　enable　us　to　form　any　accurate　opinion　on　the　merits　of　the　early　Greek　orators。

Though　it　cannot　be　doubted　that；　before　the　Persian　wars；　Athens　had　produced　eminent　speakers；　yet　the　period　during　which　eloquence　most　flourished　among　her　citizens　was　by　no　means　that　of　her　greatest　power　and　glory。　　It　commenced　at　the　close　of　the　Peloponnesian　war。　　In　fact；　the　steps　by　which　Athenian　oratory　approached　to　its　finished　excellence　seem　to　have　been　almost　contemporaneous　with　those　by　which　the　Athenian　character　and　the　Athenian　empire　sunk　to　degradation。　　At　the　time　when　the　little　commonwealth　achieved　those　victories　which　twenty…　five　eventful　centuries　have　left　unequalled；　eloquence　was　in　its　infancy。　　The　deliverers　of　Greece　became　its　plunderers　and　oppressors。　　Unmeasured　exaction；　atrocious　vengeance；　the　madness　of　the　multitude；　the　tyranny　of　the　great；　filled　the　Cyclades　with　tears；　and　blood；　and　mourning。　　The　sword　unpeopled　whole　islands　in　a　day。　　The　plough　passed　over　the　ruins　of　famous　cities。　　The　imperial　republic　sent　forth　her　children　by　thousands　to　pine　in　the　quarries　of　Syracuse；　or　to　feed　the　vultures　of　Aegospotami。　　She　was　at　length　reduced　by　famine　and　slaughter　to　humble　herself　before　her　enemies；　and　to　purchase　existence　by　the　sacrifice　of　her　empire　and　her　laws。　During　these　disastrous　and　gloomy　years；　oratory　was　advancing　towards　its　highest　excellence。　　And　it　was　when　the　moral；　the　political；　and　the　military　character　of　the　people　was　most　utterly　degraded；　it　was　when　the　viceroy　of　a　Macedonian　sovereign　gave　law　to　Greece；　that　the　courts　of　Athens　witnessed　the　most　splendid　contest　of　eloquence　that　the　world　has　ever　known。

The　causes　of　this　phenomenon　it　is　not；　I　think；　difficult　to　assign。　　The　division　of　labour　operates　on　the　productions　of　the　orator　as　it　does　on　those　of　the　mechanic。　　It　was　remarked　by　the　ancients　that　the　Pentathlete；　who　divided　his　attention　between　several　exercises；　though　he　could　not　vie　with　a　boxer　in　the　use　of　the　cestus；　or　with　one　who　had　confined　his　attention　to　running　in　the　contest　of　the　stadium；　yet　enjoyed　far　greater　general　vigour　and　health　than　either。　　It　is　the　same　with　the　mind。　　The　superiority　in　technical　skill　is　often　more　than　compensated　by　the　inferiority　in　general　intelligence。　And　this　is　peculiarly　the　case　in　politics。　　States　have　always　been　best　governed　by　men　who　have　taken　a　wide　view　of　public　affairs；　and　who　have　rather　a　general　acquaintance　with　many　sciences　than　a　perfect　mastery　of　one。　　The　union　of　the　political　and　military　departments　in　Greece　contributed　not　a　little　to　the　splendour　of　its　early　history。　　After　their　separation　more　skilful　generals　and　greater　speakers　appeared；　but　the　breed　of　statesmen　dwindled　and　became　almost　extinct。　Themistocles　or　Pericles　would　have　been　no　match　for　Demosthenes　in　the　assembly；　or　for　Iphicrates　in　the　field。　　But　surely　they　were　incomparably　better　fitted　than　either　for　the　supreme　direction　of　affairs。

There　is　indeed　a　remarkable　coincidence　between　the　progress　of　the　art　of　war；　and　that　of　the　art　of　oratory；　among　the　Greeks。　They　both　advanced　to　perfection　by　contemporaneous　steps；　and　from　similar　causes。　　The　early　speakers；　like　the　early　warriors　of　Greece；　were　merely　a　militia。　　It　was　found　that　in　both　employments　practice　and　discipline　gave　superiority。　　（It　has　often　occurred　to　me；　that　to　the　circumstances　mentioned　in　the　text　is　to　be　referred　one　of　the　most　remarkable　events　in　Grecian　history；　I　mean　the　silent　but　rapid　downfall　of　the　Lacedaemonian　power。　　Soon　after　the　termination　of　the　Peloponnesian　war；　the　strength　of　Lacedaemon　began　to　decline。　Its　military　discipline；　its　social　institutions；　were　the　same。　Agesilaus；　during　whose　reign　the　change　took　place；　was　the　ablest　of　its　kings。　　Yet　the　Spartan　armies　were　frequently　defeated　in　pitched　battles；an　occurrence　considered　impossible　in　the　earlier　ages　of　Greece。　　They　are　allowed　to　have　fought　most　bravely；　yet　they　were　no　longer　attended　by　the　success　to　which　they　had　formerly　been　accustomed。　　No　solution　of　these　circumstances　is　offered；　as　far　as　I　know；　by　any　ancient　author。　　The　real　cause；　I　conceive；　was　this。　　The　Lacedaemonians；　alone　among　the　Greeks；　formed　a　permanent　standing　army。　　While　the　citizens　of　other　commonwealths　were　engaged　in　agriculture　and　trade；　they　had　no　employment　whatever　but　the　study　of　military　discipline。　　Hence；　during　the　Persian　and　Peloponnesian　wars；　they　had　that　advantage　over　their　neighbours　which　regular　troops　always　possess　over　militia。　This　advantage　they　lost；　when　other　states　began；　at　a　later　period；　to　employ　mercenary　forces；　who　were　probably　as　superior　to　them　in　the　art　of　war　as　they　had　hitherto　been　to　their　antagonists。）　　Each　pursuit　therefore　became　first　an　art；　and　then　a　trade。　　In　proportion　as　the　professors　of　each　became　more　expert　in　their　particular　craft；　they　became　less　respectable　in　their　general　character。　　Their　skill　had　been　obtained　at　too　great　expense　to　be　employed　only　from　disinterested　views。　　Thus；　the　soldiers　forgot　that　they　were　citizens；　and　the　orators　that　they　were　statesmen。　　I　know　not　to　what　Demosthenes　and　his　famous　contemporaries　can　be　so　justly　compared　as　to　those　mercenary　troops　who；　in　their　time；　overran　Greece；　or　those　who；　from　similar　causes；　were　some　centuries　ago　the　scourge　of　the　Italian　republics；perfectly　acquainted　with　every　part　of　their　profession；　irresistible　in　the　field；　powerful