ness of sins,”—so in Luke 3: 3. Also, Acts 3: 38. "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the Holy Ghost."

Here the idea is legal-the forgiveness of sins. The common expression for this is Kaapiapos-and baptism has a direct relation to it-and immersion is never used in any such relation. How natural then the conclusion that Barrioμòs has the same sense as the word in whose familiar place it stands.

But though Baptism in these places relates chiefly to legal purification, in others it relates as clearly to moral purification, and in this respect also corresponds with kaapit which as we have seen includes both kinds of purification, legal and moral.

To sum up all in a few words βαπτίζω as well as καθαρίζω relate to both kinds of purification legal and moral, of the conscience and of the heart; and the language most commonly applied to the first is καθαίρω Οι καθαρίζω—and this is always in the ritual symbolized by sprinkling and by blood. Hence as Barris has the same extent of application with kalapit and as it stands in the same relations with it to the forgiveness of sins, it is highly probable that it has the same sense. By giving it a meaning so extensive as purify, it is adapted to fulfil all its relations. By confining it to a meaning so limited as to immerse, it is unfitted for at least one half of the relations in which it stands.

§ 13.

The account of Baptism given by Josephus, a cotemporary Jew, is perfectly in coincidence with this view.

[To be continued.]*

* Our limits oblige us to defer the remainder of this article. It will appear in the next No. of the Repository. The author examines several other passages of the New Testament in which Barrio has the sense of Katapi, and maintains by numerous quotations from the Fathers, that it was so understood by primitive Christians. The reader will find much that is curious and instructive in this discussion.

EDITOR.

ARTICLE IV.

ANCIENT AND MODERN ELOQUENCE.

By N. Cleaveland, Esq. Newbury, Mass.

In tracing the history of Eloquence, we are struck with the remarkable fact, that its earliest annals are also those of its most signal triumphs. In that age of wonders, when Athens burst upon the world in all the splendor of her literature, her arts, and arms, Eloquence was born. Like that most beautiful of the mythological fancies, the Goddess of Wisdom, it seems to have sprung at once to perfection, fullarmed and glorious. We know, indeed, that Greece abounded in orators, before the age of Demosthenes. But the earlier and ruder efforts of the art, like the impassioned talks of our own Aborigines, perished with the occasions that produced them. The eloquence of Pericles, indeed, was of a higher stamp. He seems to have been the first great orator of Greece and the world. But though we are told, and can believe, that "he thundered, and lightened, and shook all Greece," no authentic specimen of his powers remains. Of the Athenian orators immediately preceding, and cotemporary with Demosthenes, we shall make no mention here, dimmed as they were, and ever must be, by his incomparable splendor.

The superiority of Demosthenes, and his claim to rank as the greatest of orators, is universally admitted. His reputation, like that of Homer, than which it is only less ancient, may be considered as resting on an immovable basis. It is established by the admiration of his acute and fastidious countrymen-by the unbounded sway which he exerted over them--and by the dread with which he inspired their foes. Cicero, the all-accomplished orator, philosopher and statesman-Quintilian, the greatest of rhetoricians-and Longinus the ablest of critics-alike awarded to him the palm of unrivalled eloquence. Nor has the decision of antiquity been reversed by the moderns. Little as his sententious energy has been imitated, its vast superiority is conceded by

all.

It may be interesting to examine, somewhat particularly, the character of that eloquence which has thus secured the suffrage of ages, and of nations ;-and the rather as the praises which have been lavished upon it, must have excited the curiosity, if not the skepticism of those, who have never read either original or translation, or whose reading has been limited to a few short extracts in our school-books. Even among the educated men of our country, Demosthenes, for obvious reasons, is much less known than Cicero. Selected orations of the latter form a part of the preparatory course for college, while the former is scarcely studied, even in college. To read the Grecian orator in his own tongue, with a just appreciation and relish of his merits, requires a familiarity with the language, which comparatively few attain. The Greek of Demosthenes is by no means easy. The very excellencies of his style, its conciseness and idiomatic structure, render the acquisition a serious labor, even for those who have become familiar with other Greek authors. He has indeed been well translated. But few take an interest in translations, which was not first inspired by the originals. It must be remembered also, that the best translation is an imitation, rather than fac-simile-that the Greek and English idioms are widely dissimilar-and that there are peculiarities in the style of Demosthenes, which render the transfer especially difficult. In view of these considerations, it may seem less strange, though not perhaps any less to be regretted, that the acknowledged Prince of orators should be so little known, and so imperfectly appreciated.

The grand characteristic of this great man is, undoubtedly, strength. "His peculiar properties," says Longinus, "specially vouchsafed to him by immediate dispensation of the Divinity, were unrivalled and unapproachable vigor and power." It is perhaps more easy to perceive the fact, than to tell wherein the great strength of this intellectual Samson lay.

We may say, in the first place, that he was eminently argumentative. No orator can be named, who in this respect is more original, more ingenious, or more logical. In statement he is succinct and clear. His arrangement is perfect without the show of arrangement; and he is unerring in the sagacity with which he discovers his own strong points, and the weak ones of his adversary.

But his argumentation is never dry-it is never cold. His reasoning seems to proceed as much from the heart as from the head. He so intermingles his declamation with his argument, that it never appears to be declamation. Through the entire texture of his discourse, reason and passion, passion and reason, like warp and woof, are beautifully interwoven. Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say of this peculiar feature, that his argument is impassioned, and his declamation, logical. The profound, brilliant, impetuous flow of his eloquence is like that of some great river, when having escaped its rocky barriers, it has gained the gentler inclination of the alluvial plains;-no longer chafed and frothy as among the hills, nor discolored yet by admixture with the sea-deep, clear, rapid, sparkling—it rolls along, a noble image of beauty, grandeur, and irresistible power. . His conciseness has already been named. This trait was carried by our orator to such an extreme, that some have even deemed it a fault. But this we would be slow to assert. It is unquestionably one great source of his power. Every thing is finished with consummate care. Every word is significant and apt; and that very place is assigned to each, which makes it most effective. Hence, indeed, arises no small part of the difficulty of transfusing his spirit and power into another language.

With that exquisite tact, which never forsakes him, he stops always at the precise point of greatest effect. Having made a bold or happy stroke, he passes on to his argument or inference. By no needless explanation-by no superfluous embellishment, does he endanger the effect, or incur the hazard of "tearing his subject to tatters." How unlike, in this respect, to most orators of modern times!

But nothing seems to have attracted the wonder and admiration of his readers so much, as that oblivion of self which is conspicuous on every page. It is to the Olynthiacs and Philippics that we now refer. In these immortal productions Demosthenes seems to be nothing;-his subject-his causehis country-every thing. Widely different was the case with Cicero, whose elaborate pictures rarely failed to exhibit the orator himself, the most prominent figure in the foreground. While we follow the Grecian orator, we cease to wonder at his success. Such earnestness and sincerity; such all-absorbing, self-renouncing patriotism, exhibited with

such force of argument, and such powers of appeal, could not but be resistless, for we cannot resist them ourselves. Once fairly in the stream, the torrent bears us on. We think not of stopping-we cannot stop if we would. Unreluctant captives, we surrender at discretion, and realize that it is exciting and delightful, thus to feel the influence of one master

mind.

While still" our little barks attendant sail,
Pursue the triumph, and partake the gale."

we

As yet we have contemplated the orator only as he is,— speaking to us from the written page, and in a language, which by a sort of misnomer we call dead. But we shall have only an imperfect estimation of his power, until we have formed some adequate conception of what he was. We must cross the western and the midland oceans,must run up the stream of time two thousand years,—we must see the orator standing in the pride of his living power; and on the very scene of his immortal triumphs. A native of the small island of Seriphus once reproached Themistocles with deriving his greatness from that of his country. "It may be so," was the reply, "but thou could'st no more have been renowned at Athens, than 1 at Seriphus." The sentiment thus expressed is of universal application. Great talents may exist and be discoverable anywhere. But they can attain to the full measure of their greatness, only when Providence places them in a sphere of commensurate extent. Such a sphere, Demosthenes undoubtedly had.

It is well known that all the essential powers of the Athenian state were vested in the people. The government of Athens was to all intents an unmixed and unmitigated democracy. All matters, both of internal and external policy, all questions both of peace and war, were debated and decided in the popular assembly. The Athenians were a remarkable race;—a people of ardent temperament—and clear and active intellect. Perhaps no other community of equal extent has ever existed, so polished, so universally literary. Accustomed to constant attendance on dramatic exhibitions, that faultless drama, which to this day is the unrivalled model of simplicity and beauty; living in an age and land, in which the fine arts, history, poetry and eloquence were carried to the very zenith of perfection, the

--