The Romans were more arbitrary in their ideas than the Greeks, and much less inventive; they were neither as acute to demonstrate, nor as methodical to arrange the elements and results of knowledge. The literary medium of their theories was as declamatory as their notions were loose, and both their political and moral habits tended to obscure their dim conceptions of moral truth. The only redeeming quality amongst them, was national vigor, displayed mainly in warlike pursuits. From the first, the citizens of the Republic seem to have anticipated the attainment of universal empire, and they put forth endeavors commensurate with the presentiment they felt with regard to their destiny. Though unworthy to claim supremacy of esteem for any mental or philosophical enterprise of their own, it should be said to their credit, that they entertained a more vivid and enduring belief in the dignity and predetermined necessity of human advancement than was common to the Greeks. But national excellence in the realms of refined art and thought, was not to be expected while they assigned these pursuits chiefly to slaves. Virgil made one of his a poet; and Horace himself, like several inferior authors, was the son of a freedman. Leading philosophers and coarsest buffoons, the preceptor who taught, and the physician who healed, the architect who built, and the undertaker who buried, were all vassals. It has been said by the most valid authority, that not an avocation, connected with agriculture, manufactures, or education, can be named, but it was the patrimony of slaves.