345 History. [Ckap. XVIt 



cited, and the degree in which it has been imitat- 

 ed and surpassed by several succeeding historians, 

 are generally known. 



The best historians of the eighteenth century 

 diiTer from those of the same clasa in ancient times, 

 in excluding speccJws and other extraneous mat- 

 ter from tlie body of their works. This practice, 

 it is well known, was much in vogue among the 

 ancients^ and was an important part o^ t\\(t poetical. 

 and even dramatic structure at which they appear 

 to have aimed in their historical compositions*. 

 The exchision of every thing of this kind from the 

 best models of history which the last age produced, 

 deserves to be mentioned as a modern improve^ 

 ment. Connected with tliis circumstance is the 

 practice, also recently introduced, of subjoining 

 to historical v/orks, in the form of appendices, 

 those speeches, state papers, and other documents, 

 for the support or illustration of their narratives, 

 which would have encumbered or disfiii'ured the 

 text; but which, at the same time, lay open to the 

 reader the sources of information, and augment 

 the sum of instruction and amusement. 



Another point of difference between the most 

 respectable historians of the eighteenth century 

 and their predecessors, consists in the superior ex- 

 cellence of the .9/3/ /f? employed by the former. It 

 is not intended to institute a comparison with re- 

 spect to this particular, between the best ancient 

 models of history and those of modern times. 



■* Lord Monbocklo pronounces that no man can write history 

 as it ouj;ht to be written without the introduction oi sptechcs ; and 

 that exchiding them is one of the numerous symptonis pf literary 

 degeneracy which characterise modern times. 



