« ZurückWeiter »
litician, and embellishes them with the pen of an expert rhetorician. There are many masterly touches of oratory in the fictitious speeches which he puts in the mouths of bis principal characters ; the funeral oration of Pericles in the second book I have always particularly admired: perhaps Thucidydes is not unfairly characterized by Mr. Hayley
“ His the rich prize that caught his early gaze, *
Explores the seeds of war; with matchless force
General Andreossi, in a memoir lately published, containing observations on the principal historians, chiefly with a view to the accuracy of their military descriptions, says of Thuci. dydes, that “ his work is a masterpiece of military talent, unfolding the internal policy of
* When a boy he wept for emulation at hearing one of the books of Herodotus recited with applause at the Olympic games.
the Greeks, and the operations of a long and stubborn contest."
It is not easy to determine in which class to place the elegant and accomplished Xenophon. If we regard his continuation of Thucidydes, he will class with general historians; since his object was evidently to make it a general history, of Greece at least, for a considerable period. “ The Anabasis, or retreat of the ten thousand,” would by many be placed among the commentaries, memoirs, chronicles and annals; and his Cyropædia must, I think, be regarded as a fictitious narrative. The Anabasis is confessedly his most finished work. It may be considered as a history limited to a short period; but in whatever light it is regarded, nothing can be more interesting, pleasant, and entertaining. It afforded, undoubtedly, the model for Cæsar's Commentaries, but is a more interesting and finer composition. Xenophon never rises to the sublime, but is always chaste, correct, elegant, and engaging. He enchains the mind of his reader, and renders him impatient to hear what event is next to occur. Simplicity is a remarkable characteristic of this work ; even the order of the words
is little inverted, and this, with the pure Attic dictions, renders it an easy book for those who have made little progress in the Greek language. On looking into Mr. Hayley I am surprised to find how much my opinion has been anticipated by this judicious writer
“O rich in all the blended gifts that grace
Thy simple diction, free from glaring art,
* To Cæsar's rival pen and rival sword,” &c. Xenophon was much studied by the Roman warriors, as affording the best instructions in the military art, and particularly by Lucullus. General Andreossi says, “ Every military man should study Xenophon, particularly in his famous retreat of the ten thousand, when he will find it difficult to decide whether the glory of the retreat, or the merit of the narrator are most deserving of unqualified admiration.'
I am uncertain whether Polybius ought to be accounted a Greek or a Roman historian. His language is the former, but his subject is Roman; and his long residence at Rome, and his intimacy with Scipio and Lælius, almost naturalized him to that part of the world. Had his intention been completed, he would have ranked among general historians, for he styles his history “ Catholic, or Universal.” Of forty books which he wrote, however, only the first five have been transmitted to posterify, with an abridgement of the twelve following, said to have been made by the younger Brutus. General Andreossi appears more partial to this writer than to any of the other antient historians; he regards him as master of all the tactics of his time, and gives him not less credit for his correct description of all military operations. His style is, however, allowed by all to be harsh and unpolished, and is thus characterized by Mr. Hayley—
“ O highly perfect in each nobler part,
We cannot sufficiently deplore the loss of Sallust's Roman History from the death of Sylla to the conspiracy of Catiline, for we should doubtless have found in it the same depth of judgment, the same penetrating sagacity, keenness of remark, and profound knowledge of the human heart, that are conspicuous in his other works; and altogether they would have formed a fine code of Roman history during one of the most interesting periods of the Republic, which indeed it is probable the author intended. The style of Sallust is concise, nervous, and sententious. Ile was accused by his contemporaries of the affectation of using obsolete words and phrases, but I confess I am not critic enough to be a judge of this circumstance, and I find in him nothing but matter for admiration. He particularly excelled in the delineation of character, and in this at least affords a model for all future historians. General Andreossi seems to approve much of his military descriptions, particularly in his history of the Jugurthine war; but the General makes an observation, which, if I understand it properly, surprises me—“ The consumo mate ability with which Metellus extricates his