From confidering the excellence of this extraordinary language, we may indeed be difpofed to excufe, or more properly fpeaking to applaud, the exalted ftyle of praife, in which its powers were celebrated, by thofe who were the most competent judges of its merits. The accents which flowed from the lips of the venerable Neftor were defcribed by Homer as exceeding the fweetness of honey. It is an obfervation of the great Roman orator, that if Jupiter had communicated his will to mankind, he would have adopted the language of Plato. When Pericles addreffed the Athenian affemblies, he did not, in the opinion of his contemporaries, merely convince his hearers by his perfuafive arguments; but, to ufe the exalted language of his countrymen, majestic in voice and afpect, and irrefiftible in force, as if he commanded the elements of heaven, he overpowered the faculties of his aftonished hearers with the thunder and lightning of his eloquence.

III. Duration and Extent of the Language.

In addition to the curious circumftances, which diftinguith the Greek language, it may be remarked, that it was spoken and written with purity and elegance for a greater portion of time, than any other ever known in the world. The long period of twenty-three centuries will fcarcely meafure its continuance. We have feen, that as early

as

as the time of Homer its ftandard was fixed, and it continued to be cultivated till Conftantinople was taken by the Turks, in the fifteenth century. A fhort time before that event, although it exifted in a degenerate ftate among the common people, it was spoken with fuch correctness and elegance by perfons of a liberal education, and particularly by the ladies of rank and high condition, as to give no very imperfect fpecimen of the style of Ariftophanes, Euripides, and the philofophers and hiftorians, who flourished in the pureft times. Such is the very curious fact related by the learned Philelphus, who visited the metropolis of the eaftern empire twelve years only before it was taken by the Turks. The intermediate corruptions can be detected only by fcholars of more than ordinary acutenefs and obfervation. By fuch alone can the different colours and fhades of diction be diftinguished in the works of writers, who lived at times fo remote from Xenophon and Plato, as Procopius, who, in the reign of the Emperor Juftinian, wrote the History of the Wars between the Romans and the barbarous nations; Euftathius, the learned Commentator on Homer, and Anna Comnena, the daughter of the Greek Emperor Alexis, who wrote the life of her father in the 12th, and Chalcondylas, a native of Athens, who wrote the Hiftory of the Turks in the 15th century. The fame remark may be applied to other works included in the voluminous collection of the Byzantine hiftorians.

The difference between pure Greek and that

N 3

which

which was fpoken and written by foreigners was much more strongly marked. The writers of the New Teftament fall much below the claffical ftandard. Hebrew idioms, and words used in new fenfes, abound in their writings; and their ftyle, which by modern fcholars is called Hellenistic, to diftinguish it from pure Greek, will not bear the test of rigid criticism. Yet it is far from being of the fame uniform character, fince we find that St. Luke wrote with more purity of expreffion, St. John with more fimplicity and plainnefs, and St. Paul with greater copioufnefs and variety, than the other facred writers. They approached nearer to pure Greek in proportion as they poffeffed the advantages of education, and were improved by intercourfe with the higher ranks of fociety.

As this continued long to be a living language, fo was its circulation very extenfive. Under the fucceffors of Alexander it was carried far beyond the limits of the Greek provinces, and long before the Chriftian era it was fpoken by Jews, Romans, and Africans. It was cultivated by the learned in Egypt and Syria, as well as in Italy, Gaul, Spain, and Carthage. Jofephus and Philo Judæus preferred it to their native language: and the writers of the New Teftament adopted it as the beft means to facilitate the propagation of Chriftianity. Of its general prevalence, Cicero fpeaks in explicit terms in his Oration for Archias the poet; where he informs us, that, at a period when Latin was confined to very few diftricts; the Greek

authors

authors were ftudied, and their language was fpoken in moft parts of the world. With refpe&t 'therefore to its wide diffufion, the ancient Greek may be compared to modern French, but whatever degree of delicacy the French may poffefs in common with the Greek, it wants many of its moft diftinguishing characteristics, and in particular its grace and harmony, its precifion and copioufnefs, its vigour and fublimity.

There were many caufes for the great extent of the Greek language. Numerous colonies planted in different parts of Europe, Afia, and Africa; the commerce of the Greek merchants; the conquefts of Alexander the Great, and the permanent establishments, which he made, by building many large cities, contributed to this end. But the caufe, which produced this diffufion more than all others, was the intrinfic excellence of the language itself. It is a remarkable fact, that at the period when the provinces of Greece were reduced to the meaneft vaffalage, and the character of the people was funk to the loweft ftate of dif grace in the opinion of the Romans their conquerors, their language ftill continued to retain its high and original reputation, and was ftudied not only by the Romans, but by perfons of refpectability and diftinction in all parts of the ancient world. The pure Greek, as a living language, finally funk with the power of the eaftern empire under the triumphant arms of the Turks. A. D. 1453.

IV. Modern Greek.

Every scholar must naturally be defirous to afcertain the prefent ftate of the Greek language. Its deviation from that which was formerly spoken, both with respect to pronunciation and grammar, is very confiderable. The words of the language indeed, like Italian and Latin, are in fubftance the fame as thofe of antient Greek; there is, however, an intermixture of Turkish with that which is spoken in Afia; of Arabic with that which prevails on the coafts of Africa; and of Italian with that which is ufed at Benevento, and other parts of Italy. In their conjugations they imitate the practice of the moderns, by making ufe of auxiliary verbs. In their pronunciation they attend to accent, and hence the quantity of words is not only difregarded, but often moft grofsly violated; and they have intirely, loft that fweet modulation and variety of found, which graced the lips of their ancestors P. Such is their neglect of ancient literature, that the New Teltament, as well as the works of their own claffics, have been tranflated for their ufe. The decline of their language has kept pace with the degeneracy of their manners. Thefe defcendants of

P Monboddo. Fofter on Accent and Quantity, p. 207. For an elegant sketch of the political and literary state of Greece during her good and bad fortune, fee Harris's Philol. Inquiries, C. iii,

Pericles