3. It must be remembered that the main object of a historian is to inform, and of an orator to persuade; hence, the difference between a historical and an oratorical narration is, that the former, which is designed to inform correctly, must be strictly true; while the latter, which aims principally at persuasion, either total or partial, may admit of different degrees of probability.

4. The requisites of oratorical narrations, in accordance with the object of the orator, are FIRST, Perspicuity; SECOND, Probability; THIRD, Brevity; FOURTH, Ornament of Style. Of the two former qualities, we have spoken in the preceding chapter. It remains for us now, to speak of the last two only.

5. Brevity of narration means, that all unnecessary adjuncts must be retrenched; and that such only as favor the case, or the orator's object, should be mentioned.

6.

Ornament of style means, that in oratorical narrations, not only the simple, but the mid

(3.) Is the certainty required in an oratorical narration, of the same degree as that demanded by a historical one? (4.) What are the requisites of oratorical narrations, according to the object of an orator?

(5.) What does brevity of narration mean?

(6.) What does ornament of style in narrations signify?

dle and sublime styles also, may be used; the latter, especially, when passions or emotions of the mind are to be excited.

7. All narrations that have for their object, persuasion, may be referred to this class.

8. The following narration from Cicero against Verres is an illustration of the oratorical narration.

NOTE. The small numbers indicate the different periods.

VERRES' CRUELTY.

1. The unhappy man, Publius Gavius Cosanus, being arrested as he was going to embark for his native country, is brought before the wicked Prætor. With eyes darting fury, and a countenance distorted with cruelty, he orders the helpless victim of his rage to be stripped, and rods to be brought; accusing him, but without the least shadow of evidence, or even of suspicion, of having come to Sicily as a spy. 3It was in vain that the unhappy man cried out, "I am a Roman citizen: I have served under Lucius Pretius, who is now at Panormus, and will attest my innocence." "The blood-thirsty Prætor, deaf to all that he could urge in his own defense, ordered the infa

(7.) May all narrations, having for their object persuasion, be referred to this class?

(8.) Have you an example of oratorical narration, from an ancient author?

mous punishment to be inflicted. Thus, Fathers, was an innocent Roman citizen publicly mangled with scourging; whilst the only words he uttered amidst his cruel sufferings were, I am a Roman citizen!' 2 With these, he hoped to defend himself from violence and infamy. But of so little service was this privilege to him, that, while he was asserting his citizenship, the order was given for his execution-for his execution upon the cross! 70, Liberty! O, sound, once delightful to every Roman ear! O, sacred privilege of Roman citizenship! Once sacred, now trampled upon!"

9. The following narration of Aaron Burr's achievements, is also an illustration of the qualities demanded in an oratorical narration:

AARON BURR.

"Who, then, is Aaron Burr, and what the part which he has borne in this transaction? He is its author; its projector; its active executor. Bold, ardent, restless and aspiring, his brain conceived it; his hands brought it into action. Beginning his aspirations in New York, he associates with him men, whose wealth is to supply the necessary funds. Possessed of the main spring, his personal labor contrives all the machinery. Pervading the continent from New York to New Orleans, he draws into his plan, by every allurement which he can contrive, men of

(9.) Give an example of the oratorical narration from a modern author?

all ranks, and all descriptions. To youthful ardor he presents danger and glory; to ambition, rank, and titles, and honors; to avarice, the mines of Mexico. To each person, whom he addresses, he presents the object adapted to his taste; his recruiting officers are appointed; men are engaged throughout the continent. Civil life is indeed quiet upon the surface; but in its bosom, this man has contrived to deposit the materials, which, with the slightest touch of his match, produce an explosion to shake the continent. All this his restless ambition has contrived, and in the autumn of 1806, he goes forth, for the last time, to apply this match."

ARTICLE II.

PRAXIS OF ANALYSIS OF AN ORATORICAL NARRATION.

1. We propose to give here an illustration of the praxis of analysis, to be made by the scholar, when he is required to criticise a composition, or an extract of some author.

2.

As stated in the preliminary remarks, under Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6; analysis of composition has two parts; the first part consists in the general, the second part in the particular analysis. The general analysis comprises three points; first, the

(2.) How many are the parts of analysis of composition?

How many points does the general analysis comprise?

number and connection of periods; second, their variety of arrangement and government; third, the gradation and close of the composition. The particular analysis relates to the observance of the rules, peculiar to the species of composition under review. The method, or process, to be followed by the scholar, in analyzing, is, first, a statement, or assertion; second, a definition, or quotation of a rule; third, the application of either to the subject; fourth, an appropriate conclusion. Or, more briefly; first, a statement; second, the application of a rule or definition. We will exemplify both parts of analysis.

3. Let then the pupil either read in the book, or write on the black-board, the above oratorical narration from Cicero against Verres, marking the separate periods by small figures. He will then begin his analysis and criticism in the following manner :

To what does the particular analysis relate?

What is the method to be followed by the scholar, in the analysis and criticism of a composition?

(3.) Give the praxis of analysis by the pupil, on the subject of an oratorical narration.

What is the first assertion and proof respecting the first part of analysis?