From the confessions of the authors of this report, our readers must be convinced that classical studies are now at the lowest ebb in France. In England they are, on the contrary, in the highest vigor, and have an importance attached to them, which has even become a subject of complaint and reprehension with many respectable writers, who imagine that they consult the interests of the moral and physical sciences, by decrying the collegiate discipline of their country in this respect. We mention this circumstance in illustration of the extensive prevalence of classical learning among the British, and not because we concur with Mr. Edgeworth and his adherents, to the full extent of their doctrine.* We believe from what we ourselves had occasion to note in England, that too great a share" of time, of labour and of esteem" is bestowed in her public schools, upon the comparatively" unimportant business of prosody," but we are not inclined to admit that it is "the cardinal point in English education." Nor can we suppose, that the effect of this system is so baneful as represented by the Edinburgh Reviewers, particularly when we advert to what is so justly observed by these able critics, in almost the same breath," that in every other department, besides the elucidation and purification of the text of the ancient authors,in mathematics, in physics, in ethics, in politics, in history,England stands the very first in the list of nations who have accelerated the progress of knowledge."

Anterior to the revolution, ancient literature generally, was studied in France in a more superficial way, and had fewer votaries, than among her neighbours. If this were not a matter of notoriety in the learned world of Europe, we could cite in support of the fact, the authority of Thurot, an eminent hellenist of Paris, educated in the old university of that capital, and who is mentioned with honour by the authors of the present Report, in the section on philology.-In one of his late. writings he expresses himself thus-" There is no person who does not see that with respect to the study of the ancient languages, of history and of antiquities, France is far behind her neighbours, the Germans;-not that we have not at present eminent men, in each branch; but there is between us and the Germans, this very remarkable difference, that all the branches of knowledge, which are here the exclusive attribution of the third class of the Institute, are, in Germany, an object of study, and instruction in all the universities, and even in a great

Edgeworth's Professional Education, and the criticism on that work in the Edinburgh Review.

+Edinburgh Review-account of Taylor's Plato.

+ Ibid.

number of schools of the second order. Let it not, however, be imagined that this inferiority is the result of the interruption of our studies during the course of a sanguinary revolution. The instruction which was received in the university of Paris, twenty-five or thirty years ago, was very far from being as complete, and as solid as it was at the same time, in the universities of Germany and Holland. With us the Greek was much neglected; that criticism of the text of the authors, which is fitted to form the judgment of young students, and to familiarize them with the details of grammar, was scarcely known; even history and the complete knowledge of antiquity, were not objects of particular instruction."

If we substitute the English for the Germans in the first paragraph of this extract, the statement will be equally true. What is in France the exclusive attribute of the third class of the Institute, belongs to multitudes in every part of England, and is regularly and successfully taught, not only in the universities and great academies of the latter, but in her inferior schools, and wherever education is attempted in a liberal shape.

The same French writer from whom we have just quoted, has another passage connected with this subject, which we shall also venture to lay before our readers. It will serve to awaken them more fully to the truth of a position, which indeed appears to us almost self-evident;-to wit, that admitting England to have done less for the promotion of classical learning abroad;—to have given to the world fewer and less valuable editions and translations of the ancients, than some of the countries of the continent, this circumstance would not disprove her superiority in scholarship, or the unrivalled excellence of her present system of education, while-with her-classical studies extend as they do, almost to the cottage, and while all the ranks both of active and speculative life are ably filled;—while she reaps from her seminaries, a harvest of intellect, of knowledge and of virtue, superabundantly adequate not solely to supply her absolute wants,-the necessaries as it were of the body politic; but to yield the highest glory to which a great nation can aspire; the richest luxuries which she can covet.-The following extract may likewise lead to the just reflection, that the country in which knowledge is most widely diffused, and most easily obtained, where the true models of taste are most systematically taught, and generally studied, truly enjoys the pre-eminence in literature, although she may not be as rich in original works of first rate excellence, or be able to boast of as many writers of transcendent genius, as her more lucky rivals.

"It may, perhaps be said," says M. Thurot, "that France is infinitely more opulent in original productions of supereminent merit, than Germany, and then asked, what we would gain, since our native literature is already superior to that of the rest of Europe, by giving greater activity at home to the culture of the ancient languages and of erudition."

"To this objection, we may answer, that it is not for those who are endowed by nature with a happy genius or extraordinary talents, that a general system of public instruction is principally necessary, but for the bulk of the individuals to whom it is to be applied. The former, either by the impetus of their own nature, or the particular interest which they inspire, will always find the means of developing the rare faculties with which they are blessed, while the crowd of ordinary minds will languish in ignorance, for want of systematic aid, and means of instruction both numerous and extensive. The literary chefs-d'œuvre which constitute the glory of a nation, are not, therefore, in themselves, a proof of the superiority of her public instruction, or her knowledge. And, as it is not the class of superior artists,-those who are able to give the highest degree of finish and perfection to the products of their industry, that contribute to the wealth of a state, but rather, the body of manufacturing establishments in which a sensible superiority is given to articles of common consumption, over those of the same sort manufactured by rival nations, thus likewise, it is not the works of a certain number of geniuses of the first order, which entitle a people to claim pre-eminence over their neighbours in point of general and extensive knowledge, but, chiefly and properly, the plurality of schools where the elements of sound literature, and of the sciences, are taught by able professors, and after the most approved methods. Doubtless it must be superfluous to insist further on these obvious truths. Moreover, in the age in which we live, it cannot, I imagine, be necessary to demonstrate by any long process of reasoning, to sensible and candid men, that every benefit is to be expected, and no inconvenience whatever to be apprehended, from the diffusion among the mass of the citizens of a great empire, of the greatest possible quantum of light and learning."

At the conclusion of his survey of the progress of philology, M. Visconti points out certain means of reviving and sustaining "good studies," (les bonnes etudes) throughout "the great empire." Among these means are the publication of new and cheap editions of the ancients, the establishment of professorships liberally endowed, in the great cities, &c. He recom

mends likewise the encouragement of literary travels, and the association of learned men to the foreign embassies of France. These last are points that merit the attention of our own government, which hitherto seems to have overlooked altogether the important objects, of giving eclat to the country, and of making their legations popular abroad, by attaching to them men of an inquisitive character and of liberal studies.-The remarks of M. Visconti may furnish some useful hints.

"Literary travels performed by young philologists who had given proofs of their learning, and whose object it should be, to visit the principal libraries of Europe and the East, to examine the Greek and Latin works printed and manuscript, and the neglected port folios of a great number of men of letters, in order to collect the literary and historical anecdotes which might be scattered through them, would be an excellent means of reanimating in France the study of ancient literature, and of history. There can be no doubt but that travels for the purpose of discovering monuments and inscriptions, such as those of the English savans, Chandler and Stuart, undertaken at the expense of a private society, would be productive of great benefits to historical erudition, as well as to philology and criticism, which are, as it were, the interpreters of history."

"A state will never want for able men in any department of human knowledge, if those men are sure of being employed in useful and honourable offices."

Men distinguished for their erudition and their historical acquirements, might be called to serve in the diplomatic career. It would not be without advantage if there were uniformly attached to each legation of an enlightened and powerful people, some individual well versed in the history and antiquities, and capable of appreciating the literature, of the country to which the legation might be destined. This would be an additional means of conciliating foreign nations."

The second section of the report is devoted to " antiquities," a subject which can be but of little interest for our readers. We shall therefore merely remark on this section, that it is much too long for its relative importance, and filled up almost exclusively with the history of the French antiquarian labours. The next treats of the literature and languages of the East, and is the work of M. Silvestre de Sacy, who is at the head of the French orientalists. The writer has made the most of the achievements of his countrymen in this important study, but is at the same time compelled to acknowledge,―reluctantly enough however, and with as many grains of allowance

as possible, the superior value of the labours of the British in several branches;-in biblical literature, comprising the Hebrew, the Syriac, the Chaldaic, &c., and in the Persian, Sanscrit, and Indian or Hindu languages generally.

M. de Sacy claims, as may be seen in an extract which we have already made from this part of the Report, Chinese literature as the peculiar domain of the French savans. He states also, with what truth we are not competent precisely to determine, that France can boast of having done as much for Arabian literature, since the year 1789, as all the rest of Europe put together. It has been admitted without hesitation in England and elsewhere, that the most important elucidations of Chinese literature, existing at the period at which M. de Sacy wrote, were due to France; but we are inclined to doubt whether even in this way, she has given any thing to the world, as valuable as two English works recently published, the translation of the Ta Tsingleu Lee, or Penal Code of China, by Sir George Staunton, and Marshman's Dissertation on the Chinese language.-With respect to the character and institutions, social and political, of the Chinese, their customs, &c. the history of lord Macartney's Embassy, by Staunton, and the Travels of Homes and Barrow have yielded a new and abundant stock of information. The superficial account of M. de Guignes the younger, published in 1809, under the title of Voyages à Peking, Manille, &c. can bear no comparison with

these.

We regret that our limits do not allow us to lay before our readers, an abstract of the interesting narrative which M. de Sacy gives, of his own labours and of those of some of his countrymen in Arabian literature. We must be content with referring the curious to the Report itself. In the course of his statement he mentions an instance of literary imposition of too singular a nature to be passed over in silence, and which even surpasses in hardihood, the celebrated frauds of Ireland and Chatterton. "The Canon Gregorio of Palermo," says M. de Sacy, "published in that city about the year 1792, in the Arabic and Latin, a compilation of whatever was to be found in the Arabian writers concerning the history of Sicily, with an explanation of the inscriptions which embellish several monuments constructed by the Arabs, during their residence in that island. The success which attended the work of Gregorio, having augmented the desire of the learned to draw from the Arabian writers, further details concerning the history of Sicily, from the time the island fell into the power of the Arabs of Africa, until it was conquered