mistius a few notices that he actually did something of this sort, and that he lectured in the Piraeus on goodness, but that he found no adequate encouragement in the mass of people who ran together, and who left him also as rapidly as they had collected.* Whether this statement is authentic I cannot say. Plato's establishment very much resembled the Pythagorean school; it had, however, its peculiarities. He required of his pupils no oath of secrecy, and he taught before no fixed circle, not even in a closed chamber. Every body had access. In the mean time, whenever he felt obliged to animadvert on various errors in the religion of the people, and to lay down many positions which were contrary to the orthodox system, he was compelled, in order to avoid the perils with which freedom of thought had so often to contend, either to expound at certain hours his esoteric philosophy to his own pupils only, or to communicate it simply in a written form. We learn from Aristotle, that he gave such a sketch of his esoteric philosophy.‡ In respect to the method which he pursued in his philosophical statements, I find two contrary opinions. Brucker believes that it was not different from the one which we find in his writings. Meiners, on the contrary, maintains that he adopted the manner of the sophists. But we here want definite information, so that we cannot decide positively respecting it. In the mean time, though Plato did not expound his system by means of conversations, but in connected discourses, still it is not probable that he would declaim exactly in the manner of the sophists, inasmuch as his design was not to excite astonishment, or to make use of persuasion, but to convince by arguments. Hence it is to me at least evident, that his method was the dialogistic, if not universally, still in certain cases, especially in the presence of recently admitted scholars. It was customary then to teach philosophy by means of questions and answers, and no other mode of instruction was fitted so well to his doctrines respecting ideas. It seems that Plato always examined new students in order to ascertain whether they were furnished with the necessary qualifications. This examination consisted in his presenting to them before everything else Orat. XXI. edit. Harduini, 145. + Olymp. the excellence of philosophy, and also the difficulties with which one must struggle, and the exertions which he must make, in order to obtain possession of it. If by such representations, the desire was not suppressed but rather strengthened, if zeal and unquenchable interest gleamed forth, he regarded it as a good omen, and believed that such pupils had the talents and dispositions to dedicate themselves to philo. sophy. Perhaps he gave to them certain propositions and problems, and allowed them to make trial of their powers, so that they might see whether they could search out in their own reflection, the necessary arguments and proofs. This exertion, this calling to self-reflection was a part of the examination to which he subjected new pupils. The study of the mathematics was regarded as a preparatory exercise to philosophy, as it accustomed the mind to self-knowledge, and, what Plato particularly valued, to the use of the pure reason. According to Brucker, Plato required of his pupils that they should make themselves perfectly acquainted with mathematics before they commenced the study of philosophy. But though he has brought no definite testimony in favor of this conclusion, still every one will think it probable that Plato gave instructions to his disciples in this science, since it has so intimate a connection with philosophy, and since he was not far from being the greatest mathematician of his time. The Platonic school had some resemblance to the Pythagorean, inasmuch as the improvement of the heart was united with the cultivation of the understanding. For this purpose, Pythagoras had introduced a kind of orderly arrangement which required of the members a strict observance of certain rules, and by means of subordination and discipline which were inseparably attendant, he exercised control over them. Plato did not adopt this regulation, but followed, in respect to it, an entirely different maxim. Without giving himself the air and appearance of a king, who is used only to command, he sought to educate the moral character of his friends and to amend their faults, while by means of arguments, admonitions and his own example, he influenced their mode of thinking and action in a way which was consistent with their native rights and personal freedom. By such means, he brought Speusippus back to a better mind, who in his youth had trodden the hazardous path of dissipation. The sharp reproofs and admonitions of his parents had been in vain. But Plato, by gentle conduct and an entirely different treatment, awakened the feeling of shame and the resoluion of amendment." ART. III.-DILLAWAY'S TERENCE. PUB. TERENTii Afri Andria Adelphique. Ex editione Westerhoviana. Accedunt Notæ Anglica. Cura C. K. Dillaway, A. M. Bostoniæ: Perkins et Marvin. 1839. AMONG Latin writers, next to Horace, Terence has pleased most universally and most deeply. The refined elegance of Virgil, the vigorous majesty of Lucretius, and the elaborate polish of Ovid have each found warm admirers; but the courtier, the philosopher, and the epicurist must yield the palm of universal favor to the slave; the early and thoroughly trained Romans to the foreigner. The charm of the comedies of Terence every classical student feels, and they are no less appreciated by the mere man of taste and wit. There is in them perfect simplicity and purity of language, which yet never descends to grossness and vulgarity, and surpassing truth and completeness in the delineation of character; no coarse buffoonery to excite disgust, and no affectation of singularity in the sketches of life. The expressions of feeling arise naturally from natural incidents, and with clearly marked humor of both character and plot are mingled descriptions of great beauty and truth, and touches of exquisite pathos. The comic element, does not predominate in the plays of Terence. They seldom excite a laugh. They are comedies, not so much because witty and diverting, as because the incidents and characters are taken from common life, and are true representations of it. Of the peculiarities of the character and life of Terence we have little knowledge, but what is mere inference and * Plut. de Discrimine Amici et Adul. 71. nɛgi qiladelplas p. 491. uncertain. He is supposed to have perished by shipwreck on his return from Greece, when not far from thirtyfive years old. Six of his comedies remain, Andria, Eunuchus, Heautontimoroumenos, Adelphi, Hecyra, Phormio. For the plot of his plays he was mostly indebted to Menander. How far he was a mere translator, and how far his own taste and genius changed the style of his original, are topics we cannot now discuss. Yet there is an apparent freedom in all his writings which leads us to doubt that his obligations in this respect have been overrated. * The edition of Mr Dillaway is put forth with the same accuracy and neatness which have distinguished the series of classics from the same press. The form and size are convenient. The notes are prepared with good taste. Were we disposed to find fault with the work, we should repeat what has been said of another volume of the series in this journal, that the notes have not a specific adaptation to any class of readers. There are many which the scholar familiar with the author does not need, and others which the mere beginner will hardly profit by. The illustrations of sentiment and diction from other poets, both English and Latin, are not always appropriate, at least not obviously so. For example, the quotations from Virgil in the note to page 30 line 19, and on p. 9 line 4. Sometimes the notes are so brief, a mere paraphrase, that a learner will hardly understand their pertinence; e. g. the notes to p. 35, lines 1, 2 and 3. The account of the metres might well have been made more full and definite. The text is that of the splendid and copious edition of Westerhof. The editions of Westerhof and of Bentley appeared in the same year, 1726. Bishop Monk, in his life of Bentley, relates a curious anecdote of them which is worth repeating. Bentley's dissertation upon the. Terentian metres, he says, at once made plain and easy a subject which was before intricate, and, as many imagined, entirely hopeless; and an edition of this author containing the scansion of every verse, proved to all, even to those who might take occasional exceptions, that the problem was fairly solved, and the laws of Terence's measures discovered. This publication was attended with another peculiar circumstance of triumph. A large and handsome edition of Terence, accompanied with a commentary, had been for some time in the press at the Hague; the Dutch editor, Westerhof, mentions in his preface Bentley's idea of restoring the metrical arrangement of the lines of this comedian, with the following sneer: Habebit igitur in quo se exerceat Vir Cl. RICHARDUS BENTLEIUS, si quod ad Horat. Serm. ii. 5. 79. p. 513. profitetur, aliquando novem TERENTII editionem ad priscos numeros adornaturus sit. He then proceeds to show the difficulty of recovering the metres of the comedian, and argues that the attempt must be at the present day hopeless, chimerical, and absurd. Unluckily for Westerhof, Bentley's Terence appeared at the same moment as his own; and scholars saw the very achievement which one editor pronounced to be impossible, actually accomplished by the other. Nor was this all; the popularity of Bentley's performance causing another edition to be immediately in request, it was printed at Amsterdam; and the person employed by the bookseller to construct the index was no other than Westerhof himself, who thus condescended to assist the triumph of his rival. ART. IV. VIEWS OF EDUCATION IN THE EARLY DAYS OF NEW ENGLAND. COTTON MATHER'S EDUCATION OF HIS CHildren. "In the business of educating his children, Cotton Mather was far more judicious than could have been expected from a man of his peculiar temperament, and certainly deserves great credit for acting on a system, which was entirely opposed to the prevailing theory and practice. His son, who had the best opportunities of knowing, says that he was zealous against the slavish way of education carried on with raving, kicking, and scourging; he looked upon it as a dreadful judgment of God upon the world.' He believed that children were alive to principles of reason and honor at a much earlier period of life than is generally supposed. He endeavored, first of all, to convince them of his own affection, and in that way to lead them to the belief that to follow his judgment was the best way to secure their own good. He impressed upon them that it was shameful to do wrong; and, when one of his children |