cious arguments which he contributed to circulate but it is not improbable that a prejudicial effect was produced by the false notions of the poet on the mind of the translator, naturally disposed as it was, to a sullen conceit and impatience of controul: he confesses indeed to have dwelt with unbecoming pleasure on the wanton descriptions of Lucretius. Certain it is, that by publishing his translation at a period when the nation was just awakened from the effects of the fanatical spirit, by which it had been hurried into the most mischievous excesses, and when it was disposed to follow the corrupt and superficial men who presided over the literature and society of the time, into all the delusions of error, he contributed to support the cause of infidelity. There can be little doubt that many caught eagerly at the absurd principles of the Epicurean philosophy, agreeable as they were to some theories propagated by Descartes and other foreign writers; and hence it was that his translation, tedious and insipid as it often is, was extolled as a work of considerable genius, and the author flattered far beyond his pretensions to praise.

The extravagant theory of Lucretius,

however animated by the spirit of the original poetry, was incapable of bearing critical examination. Many writers in this and other countries have refuted its fallacies, as Cardinal de Polignac, Thomas Cave, and others; among whom Henry More * and Richard Blackmore should be particularly mentioned, the former for his work on the Immortality of the Soul; and the latter for his Poem on the Creation, which is now too much neglected, though it justly obtained the praise of Addison; and likewise of Johnson, who seems to assent to the testimony of Dennis, when he describes it as "a philosophical poem which has equalled that of "Lucretius in the beauty of its versification, "and infinitely surpassed it in the solidity "and strength of its reasoning."

66

CHAP. XLIII.

Marcus Tullius Cicero.

CICERO, if contemplated as an orator, a statesman, and a philosopher, must be regarded as the most accomplished character in the annals of Rome. He flourished at a period when every distinction which he displayed was heightened by competition with men of considerable eminence; and while bis eloquence rivalled that of Greece, at its most illustrious periods, and his political talents defended the safety and liberties of his country, he found leisure to cultivate literature and philosophy to an extent far beyond what his contemporaries had effected, and has interested all ages by the description of the retreats in which he enjoyed the leisure and repose of domestic and social life.

Cicero was considered as having alone manifested a greatness correspondent to the dignity of the Roman empire. He was born

at Arpinum, in the 647th year of Rome, 106 years before Christ. He is by some described as having derived his descent from a noble and even royal ancestry * among the Volsci, whilst others represent him to have been born of a family of equestrian rank at Rome. He appears to have studied under Molo at Rome and at Rhodes, and under other eminent men at Athens and in Asia, conversing with the leaders of the chief sects. At Athens he was initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries, which are supposed by Warburton to have been designed to impress the mind with a conviction of the unity of God, and of the immortality of the soul +.

Cicero exerted his great talents principally at Rome, but he presided with distinguished probity over a part of Sicily and in Cilicia. We cannot with Quintilian consider the character of Cicero as having illustrated every virtue; and contemplating it under the different points of view before referred to, we must admit many defects. He lived, however, in times of peculiar difficulty, when the fac

• Heinsius not. ad. Sil. Ital. 1. viii. v. 407. Prosper. Chron. p. 679.

† Divin. Legat, vol. i.

tious and licentious spirit of the people introduced every embarrassment, and exposed the state to every danger.

It has been observed, that this great orator, in the spirit of a professional declaimer, sometimes defended causes which his own judgment condemned, and sacrificed the principles of justice to favour and popularity. In general, however, he directed his abilities to the exposure of public delinquents, and to the protection of men who justified his able support. As a statesman, eminent for patriotism and probity, he betrayed some inconsistency and indecision, at an important crisis, when called upon to take an active part against Cæsar, but we must remember, that he was actuated by a desire of reconciling the contending parties, and of sparing (as he declared to Cassius *) the effusion of human blood, a motive indeed highly honourable. After the establishment of Cæsar's power, he departed, perhaps, somewhat from the dignity of his character, and admitted too easily a spirit of despondence and of self-indulgence; nevertheless, when shut out from the course of his former glory, he exerted