to bring over eloquence to a more austere taste, which had been
corrupted and enervated by very many softnesses and delicacies. Then
Seneca was almost the only author young people read with pleasure. I did
not strive to exclude him absolutely, but could not bear that he should
be preferred to others much better, whom he took all possible pains to
cry down, because he was conscious that he had taken to a different
manner from their way of writing, and he could not otherwise expect to
please people who had a taste for these others. It was Seneca's lot,
however, to be more loved than imitated, and his partizans run as wide
from him as he himself had fallen from the ancients. Yet it were to be
wished that they had proved themselves like, or had come near, him. But
they were fond of nothing in him but his faults, and every one strove to
copy them if he could. Then priding themselves on speaking like Seneca,
of course they could not avoid bringing him into disgrace.

His perfections, however, were many and great. His wit was easy and
fruitful, his erudition considerable, his knowledge extensive--in which
last point he sometimes was led into mistakes, probably by those whom he
had charged to make researches for him. There is hardly a branch of
study on which he has not written something; for we have his orations,
his poems, epistles, and dialogs. In philosophic matters he was not so
accurate, but was admirable for his invectives against vice.

He has many bright thoughts, and many things are well worth reading in
him for improvement of the moral character; but his elocution is, for
the most part, corrupt, and the more dangerous because its vices are of
a sweet and alluring nature. One could wish he had written with his own
genius and another's judgment. For if he had rejected some things, if he
had less studiously affected some engaging beauties, if he had not been
overfond of all his productions, if he had not weakened the importance