original Latin. It is probable indeed, that as the claffical language of Rome flourished for fo fhort a period, it had never ex ended to the provinces of Italy, where the inhabitants of Apulia, Tufcany, Umbria, Magna Græcia, Lombardy, and Liguria, were all diftinguished by their peculiar dialects. The prevalence of Greek likewife had no inconfiderable influence in fhortening the continuance of pure Latin, as the Greek had long been fashionable among the polished Romans; and when the feat of empire was removed, it entirely fuperfeded the ufe of Latin in the court of Conftantinople.

The accurate obferver of the Latin tongue may trace its progrefs through the fucceffive ftages which may be called its infancy, childhood, manhood, and old age. The infancy marks the time, when Saturn and Janus reigned over the moft ancient inhabitants of Italy, and the Salii pronounced in honour of the gods their wild and unpolished verses. The childhood refers to the reign of the kings, and the establishment of the laws of the twelve tables. Its manhood denotes the decline of the republic, and the rife of the empire, when poetry was cultivated by Terence, Lucretius, Virgil, and Horace; eloquence by Hortenfius and Cicero; biography by Cornelius Nepos, and hiftory by Livy. Its old age characterises the time of the lower empire, when falfe refinement prevailed, and the language became debased and corrupted.

III. State of the Language in modern Times.

The extenfive conquefts of the Romans, their conftant intercourfe with other nations, and powerful influence over them, promoted the wide diffufion of their language. The general establishment of their laws, and the cuftom of pleading in the courts of justice in the Latin language, laid the natives of many countries under the neceffity of making it a part of their education. After the fall of the empire, the Germans, as foon as they directed their attention to literature, revived it by the study of the imperial law. Nor did the authority of the Popes contribute less to preferve and diffeminate it; for it was their refined policy to oppose the learning of Rome as a barrier against the encroachments of the Greek church; fo that the popularity of the Latin tongue bore no inconfiderable proportion to the extent of the pontifical power. To these causes may be attributed the prevalence of Latin, as a living language, upon the continent of Europe. It is at prefent spoken with fluency not only in France and Italy, by thofe who have received a liberal education, but even by the peasants in many parts of Germany, Hungary, and Poland.

Whilft the Romans were mafters of the ancient world, and even fince the revival of learning, no language has had better pretenfions to the title of an univerfal language than the Latin. So great

VOL. I.

M

has

has been its prevalence, that it has been cultivated by every enlightened nation; and there is no branch of learning, difcovery of art, or fyftem of fcience, and indeed fcarcely any topic of liberal difcuffion or inquiry, which has not been indebted to it for expreffion, ornament, and illuftration. This has always been the vehicle of communication between men of letters, and has enabled them to carry on a correfpondence with each other from the most distant places. Many celebrated authors have confidered their native tongues, as either unpolished in their phrafeology, or confined in their circulation; and therefore have had recourfe to the language of ancient Rome. The rays of science and learning, that beam from many valuable productions have been tranfmitted to the world through this clear and beautiful medium. This is the language in which were compofed the invaluable works of Erafmus, Grotius, Pufendorff, Newton, Boerhaave, Bacon, and Gravina.

Even in the present age, every writer who wishes his works to defcend to remote pofterity, muft not venture to erect the monuments of his fame with the perishable materials which modern languages fupply, highly refined and firmly eftablished as they may appear. They are in a state of gradual alteration, and are fubject to the caprices of fashion and novelty but the Latin is fixed and permanent. The phrafeology of Chaucer and Hollinfhed, of Malherbe and Rabelais, has long been obfolete, whilft that of Cicero, Virgil, and Horace, tried

by the teft of centuries, and confecrated by the refpect of mankind, flourishes in perpetual youth. The language once spoken by the conquerors of the world, is ftill used to exprefs the dictates of gratitude, honour, and veneration. It is infcribed upon the public edifices, the monuments and the medals of every country in Europe; and tranfmits the remembrance of patriots, philofophers, heroes, and scholars, through the fucceffive generations of mankind, in terms, which, with respec both to dignity and precifion, no modern tongue can equal.

At the revival of learning, the opinion of fcholars was by no means uniform, as to the proper ftandard of Latin compofition. Longolius, Bembo, Paulus Manutius, and fome other refpectable writers, were advocates for the exclufive imitation of Cicero, and endeavoured to gain the claffic palm, by prefenting in their works a fervile copy of his ftyle. This predilection was feverely cenfured, and the right of the other claffics to equal attention was ably maintained by Henry Stephens, Politian, and Erafmus. The controverfy, carried on with much warmth of temper, and ingenuity of argument on both fides, has long ceafed: and a general acquaintance with all the writers of the Auguftan age, has been cultivated by thofe who withed to acquire an elegant Latin ftyle. Modern writers of Latin have rife to fame in proportion as they have fucceeded in copying thefe models; but fubject, however, to the defects which neceffa

rily attend the study of a foreign language, their expreffions generally take a tincture from their native tongues; and under the Roman disguise may frequently be difcovered the features of the French, the German, or the English. Juftice however restrains us from applying this remark with equal force to the Italians, as the derivation of their language, and their defcent from a Roman origin, enable them to tread more exactly in the fteps of their illuftrious ancestors.

To write Latin with eafe and elegance, can only be the attainment of him, who is equally a found fcholar and a man of taste. To store his memory with choice phrafes, culled from the beft claffics, is not fufficient: for this would only make his style a kind of patch-work; he muft ftudy them, not fo much for their particular words as their general manner, and he muft labour with unremitting affiduity to develope the art and unravel the texture of their compofitions. His next care must be to adapt claffical Latin to his own ideas, in a manner fuitable to the nature of his particular fubject; and, when he adorns himself with the drefs of the ancients, he muft endeavour to move with grace, and exprefs himself with eafe and dignity. Thus may be acquired, by attentive obfervation and repeated trials, that diction which is pure, but not affected; learned but not pedantic; and claffi

4

Confult Walchius de Imitatione, c. xiv. and c. xv.

cal