OF LITERATURE. 



XIX 



complete and glorious a revolution in the Greek 

 philosophy. 



While Socrates purified the spirit and cor- 

 rected the tendency of philosophical researches; 

 while he even laid, by the hands of his disciples, 

 the foundations of systematic speculation ; he 

 himself wrote nothing. Yet his colloquial les- 

 sons, preserved by that affectionate enthusiasm, 

 which his virtues kindled, and his very eccen- 

 tricities helped to keep alive, gave birth to the 

 bi'anch of literature, that numbers among its 

 foremost names those of Xenophon and Plato. 

 In the pages of Xenophon we find a lively sketch 

 of the Socratic ethics, and noble views of natural 

 religion, which have almost exhausted that pro- 

 vince of argument ; but there is a want of depth 

 and of completeness on the more abstruse points 

 of metaphysics, which is somewhat unsatisfactory 

 when compared with the vastness and profundity 

 that distinguish the writings of PLATO.* That 

 illustrious man was more earnest and exclusive 

 than his elegant contemporary in his devotion to 

 philosophy. Except in a few trivial attempts to 

 bestow the poetical dress on thoughts that ever 

 teemed with the fine essence of poetry ; attempts, 

 from which his own sagacity, or the advice of his 

 great master speedily diverted him; he did not 

 waste his fire on other pursuits. Without being 

 a methodical writer, he had an intellect too dis- 

 cerning and too accurate to leave mental science 

 as vague and undefined as he found it He 

 shadowed out its chief divisions, and their mutual 

 dependencies ; and was a benefactor to philoso- 

 phy even with regard to form. But much more 

 did he benefit philosophy by the light and glory 

 which his genius flung around every topic it 

 embraced, and by the unrivalled fascinations of 

 a style that drained all the treasures of the 

 Grecian tongue. We forgive the infidelity, with 

 which he often distorted or exaggerated the 

 views of Socrates ; the mysticism into which he 

 is prone to dream himself away ; the folly of 

 some of his political reveries; the perverseness 

 of some of his ethical doctrines; all is forgiven, 

 as we smile or sigh beneath the spells of this 

 mighty wizard. The shape into which he has 

 thrown his productions; that shape of dialogue 

 which, as managed by him, appears so easy and 

 delightful, that it requires the repeated failures 

 of other writers to demonstrate its intrinsic dif- 

 ficulty ; afforded room for every grace of com- 

 position, from the smartness of dramatic retort, 

 to the flow of copious dissertation ; and in Plato 

 every grace is found. His style appears to 

 possess a principle of self-adaptation, by which 



it responds, with miraculous facility, to each 

 varied mood of sentiment and passion. He is 

 at once a satirist, a rhetorician, a critic, a fabu- 

 list, and, when he pleases, a sophist. We follow 

 him with admiration through all his changes ; 

 we are charmed with him under all aspects; but 

 most, perhaps, in those introductory or incidental 

 passages of narrative or description, wherein he 

 combines the skill of a consummate artist with 

 the rich and eloquent enthusiasm of a devout 

 lover of the beautiful. 



To this vein of mingled fancy and reason ; to 

 this Proteus-like pliancy of style ; to this profu- 

 sion of picturesque and glowing imagery ; the 

 strongest of all possible contrasts is seen in the 

 works of him, who has exerted, and down to the 

 present hour continues to exert, an influence 

 commensurate with that of Plato upon the whole 

 fabric of philosophy. Were it not that there is 

 somewhat of a kindred spirit in the acuteness 

 and dexterity, with which both wield the weapon 

 of analysis; that there is an agreement in many 

 of' their fundamental doctrines, and their ab- 

 stract principles of taste ; and that a sort of filial 

 tenderness perceptibly moderates the tone of 

 the pupil when alluding to his master; it would 

 be impossible to believe that ARISTOTLE * was 

 for twenty years the disciple, and during a large 

 portion of that period the favourite disciple of 

 Plato. For, in the method of philosophizing, in 

 the matter and limits assigned to philosophy, 

 and in the proposed end and object of some of 

 its branches, the chief of the Peripatetics places 

 himself in decided opposition to the founder of 

 the Academy. With him commenced that war 

 between empiricism and rationalism, as they are 

 technically called, which has raged ever since. 

 But in style the difference of the two leaders is 

 perhaps most deeply marked; and certainly not 

 to the advantage of Aristotle. The fair and 

 flowing stream of Plato's eloquence seems to 

 have sunk without effect into the arid texture of 

 his pupil's mind. A contempt of the flowers of 

 diction, a resolute rejection of ornament, are the 

 prominent features of the Aristotelian style. It 

 is so dry as to approach the confines of dulness ; 

 so elliptical as frequently to border on the enig- 

 matic. Moreover, it wants the easy command 

 of idiomatic phraseology, the genuine Atticism, 

 with which Plato captivates his readers. We 

 detect in it decided traces of that corruption of 

 the Athenian dialect, which dates from the era 

 of Alexander, and are already called upon to 

 mourn over the decay of the noblest vehicle ever 

 invented for the thoughts of man. Yet Aristotle, 



B. C. 420317. 



2 



* B. C. 384-322. 



