braced, also, jurisprudence and medicine; so that a university comprised five faculties, each of which had its own professor. A broad distinction was, also, now made between public and private instructors. The schools which had been established, during the previous period, not only in Rome, but in other cities of Italy were in a flourishing condition. The same may be said of Africa and especially of Gaul, where schools with salaried teachers were supported, in almost every city of importance. So also, in Spain, science and poetry seemed to have been cultivated with zeal, and considering the period, not without success. But these circumstances were ineffectual to stay the progress of corruption, and Roman literature continued to decline. Good taste was now completely banished from literature, and artificial refinement, redundancy, intolerable bombast, and sometimes a ridiculous pomp of words usurped its place. The language had departed still further from its original purity; many words had lost their distinctive meaning, and were confounded with each other; and so great had been the influx of foreign and newly-coined words and idioms, that it became necessary, in order to acquire a knowledge of the language, to go back to the productions of the classic age. With reference to this point, we must not omit to mention the meritorious labors of the learned grammarians of this period, nor the influence exerted by the public schools, which, as we have seen, had been established in Rome, and in other parts of the empire. They upheld, for a long time, the love of learning and stayed the advance of barbarism; although, on the other hand, it must be confessed that they inflicted irreparable injury by their spiritless treatment of the subject. The youth committed to their care were not fired with the enthusiasm of the scholar, and taught to direct their talents to the accomplishment of high and worthy ends. They were merely trained for the ordinary pursuits of life, in which the love of gain was the most potent, if not the only incentive to exertion. Never The work which we are reviewing reads-Artzneiwissenschaft und Medicin-which is evidently an error-perhaps typographical. The author himself shows that it should be Rechtswissenschaft. + The number of professors was as follows. For grammar i. e. philology, twenty; ten for Greek and the same number for Latin; for rhetoric, five Greek and two Roman; for philosophy, one; for jurisprudence, two. The number of professors in the fifth faculty is not known. theless, even this period was illustrated by a succession of noble spirits, chiefly poets, who elevated themselves, by their genius, above an age which was unworthy of them. Poetry was little appreciated and still less encouraged, and was valued chiefly in its relation to other pursuits. The drama was silent. The peculiar nature of this art, together with the sedulous imitation of ancient models, guarded it, to some extent, against that irruption of false taste which overspread every other. Eloquence displayed, in their full extent, the vitiating influences of the period. Divorced from active life, and circumscribed within narrow limits, it flourished merely in the schools of the rhetoricians, or in the service of the emperors, who cherished it only as a means of gratifying their pride and vanity, or strengthening their authority and power. But it was as destitute of moral worth, as it was despicable as an art. Still less favor was extended to philosophy, which in some measure, yet flourished at Athens, in the schools of the Grecian philosophers. Grammar or philology, rose into great importance, as most befitting an age which was unambitious of originality, and was content to draw upon the labors of its predecessors for the matter and form of its productions. The spread of christianity has sometimes been alledged as one of the causes of the decline and fall of Roman literature. This, however, is destitute of proof. Christianity is guiltless of the crime. On the contrary, it may be affirmed, that the wide diffusion of the christian religion was one of the principle means of preserving the Latin language, as the language of letters and of books, and saving Roman literature amid the general wreck and ruin of the empire. We have thus followed the footsteps of our author, in his cursory review of the history of Roman literature, from the incipient period of its development down to the fall of the Roman empire. It would be interesting and instructive to proceed further, and contemplate the Latin language and literature, in the changes which were impressed upon them by those barbarian hordes that overspread the civilized world, and drew over it the gloom of the dark ages. But our limits forbid. In surveying the whole field of Roman literature, and tracing every where the influence of Grecian literature, alike in its materials and its form, we are compelled to deny to the former, almost all originality and independence, and as cribe to it, as its highest merit, a successful imitation of the latter. Although this cannot be denied, and is pre-eminently true with reference to some particular branches, especially poetry, yet the literature of Rome will ever be an attractive subject to the scholar and to the historian. Irrespective of the individuality and subjective character of certain writers, traits which are always displayed on such occasions as were fitted to develope them, and which are never entirely obscured, even by the imitation of Grecian models; irrespective, also, of the influence of the Roman language and literature, which is apparent in the whole history of the middle ages and in the institutions, political and religious, of the present age, the literature of this people possesses a character of its own, which is sufficiently peculiar to attract observation and inquiry. It is pervaded, throughout, by a truly national spirit. The majesty of Rome and her dominion over the nations of the earth are the ideas which constitute the peculiar spirit of Roman literature. A stern and proud patriotism filled the minds of her writers, and this, developed in their works, forms the life and substance of her literature. In this respect, there is an elevation, a power and a freshness in their productions, which we seek, in vain, in the elaborate efforts of Grecian rhetoricians and sophists. To the Roman, nothing possessed any value that did not tell upon the interests of his country, that did not look to the power, dignity, and glory of Rome. Hence the scorn with. which he contemplated matters of pure speculation, unconnected with the practical realities of life. This test he applied to all literary and scientific pursuits; it was this that determined the literary activity of the nation, and formed its literature, which reflects, as in a mirror, the life and spirit of the Roman character. It is this peculiarity also, which constitutes the marked distinction between Greek and Roman literature. Hence it has been appropriately remarked by Ast, that the inward, intellectual and scientific life of the nations of antiquity is represented by the Greeks, while their outward, political and historical life finds its development in the Romans. The language of this wonderful people accords most admirably with their national character. No one can fail to admire its compressed Grundriss der Philolog. S. 410. Gesch. der Mesncheit. B. xiv, cap. 5. Herder's Ideen zur Philosoph. u. and sententious brevity, its stern gravity, and the power and dignity of its majestic tread. It is a language befitting the conquerors of the world. The characteristics of the two noble languages of antiquity have been so beautifully, and truthfully, exhibited by a late elegant scholar, that we cannot do better than transfer his remarks to our pages. "Greek-the shrine of the genius of the old world, as universal as our race, as individual as ourselves; of infinite flexibility, of indefatigable strength, with the complication and the distinctness of nature herself; to which nothing was vulgar, from which nothing was excluded; speaking to the ear like Italian, speaking to the mind like English; with words like pictures, with words like the gossamer film of the summer; at once the variety and picturesqueness of Homer, the gloom and the intensity of schylus; not compressed to the closest by Thucydides, not fathomed to the bottom by Plato, not sounding with all its thunders, nor lit up with all its ardors under the Promethean touch of Demosthenes! And Latin-the voice of empire and of war, of law and of the state; inferior to its half-parent and rival in the embodying of passion and in the distinguishing of thought, but equal to it in sustaining the measured march of history, and superior to it in the indignant declamation of moral satire; stamped with the mark of an imperial and despotizing republic; rigid in its construction, parsimonious in its synonymes; reluctantly yielding to the flowery yoke of Horace, although opening glimpses of Greek-like splendor in the occasional inspirations of Lucretius; proved, indeed, to the uttermost by Cicero, and by him found wanting; yet majestic in its barrenness, impressive in its conciseness; the true language of history, instinct with the spirit of nations, and not with the passions of individuals; breathing the maxims of the world and not the tenets of the schools; one and uniform in its air and spirit, whether touched by the stern and haughty Sallust, by the open and discursive Livy, by the reserved and thoughtful Tacitus."* We have now accomplished all that we proposed to do, which was to give our readers a specimen of the work before us. We have followed the track of the author through the wide extent of Roman literature, abridging, retrenching or enlarging his observations, as seemed most convenient, but adhering, in the main, to his views. We now commend the work to our readers, as one of the most valuable contributions that have been made to the study of this interesting subject. * H. N. Coleridge's Study of the Greek Classic Poets, p. 34. ART. VI. THE MEMPHIS CONVENTION. Report on the Memorial of the Memphis Convention: made in the Senate of the United States, on the 26th June, 1846. By JOHN C. CALhoun. MACBETH'S soliloquy, at the repeated rising of Banquo's Ghost, might well be applicable to the policy of internal improvements by the General Government "the times have been That, when the brains were out, the man would die, Five Presidents have interposed the veto to arrest this policy,-Madison, Monroe, Jackson, Tyler and Polk. Yet it still lives, a portentous element in the politics of the Union; with a greater confusion of parties, and consequently a stronger combination of power than ever, upholding it. The chief cause of the vitality of this system, in the Legislation of Congress, is undoubtedly the lust of gain, seeking gratification in the form of imposing the taxes by the General Government, on the one hand, and their appropriation, on the other. But there is another cause, which has strongly conduced to render these successive vetos inoperative to destroy this policy-and that cause is in the vetos themselves. The messages, assigning the reasons required by the constitution, for interposing them, have not been satisfactory. They have not been convincing in their reasonings or positions, even to the minds of those who were opposed to the policy. It is, therefore, not at all surprising, that they carried no conviction to its advocates and beneficiaries. The Government of the United States is essentially one of principles. These principles in the main, regard the partition of powers between the Federal and State Governments. No policy can stand, especially if it is of the self-denying order, withholding from Congress the exercise of power, to which it is ever prone, that is not based on clear and fixed principles, vitally affecting the Government, and worthy to be vindicated in the organization of parties. Unfortunately, the veto messages put the question of internal improvement on no such principles. Mr. Madison placed his objection to the Bonus bill, entirely on VOL. X.-NO. 20. 34 |