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 deter mine, 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

by the Norman kings, an individual of an enterprising character, but not possessed in a sufficient degree, of the knowledge necessary for the execution of his arduous plan, conceived the project of supplying the deficiency of authentic materials, by fabricating a very copious correspondence between the governors of Sicily, and the Arabian monarchs of Africa, on whom they depended. The scheme succeeded beyond all probability. The author of it, the Abbé Vella, whose knowledge of the Arabian extended no further, than the ability to speak the Maltese idiom, published at first in Italian only, with the aid of the government of the two Sicilies, six volumes in quarto, under the title Codice Diplomatico de Sicilia, and afterwards a volume in folio, under the title of Libro del Consiglio d'Egitto. He did not however mean to stop there; but was printing a second volume at the expense of the Sicilian government, when suspicions conceived and suggested by some of the learned, reached the ears of the king. Mr. Hager who was then at Naples, was commissioned to inquire into the affair, and his report having opened the eyes of the government, the impostor received the reward which he merited."

We shall now pass to the section of history, which opens a wider field for remark and reprehension than any of the rest, and merits a much more ample discussion than our limits will admit.-It is written in a spirit of the grossest egotism, and of the most servile partiality, claiming for the historians of France a monopoly of excellence, and censuring indiscriminately, in such of them as have written since the revolution, whatever is adverse to the genius or supposed preferences of the present government. The authors unmindful of the ostensible scope of the Report, which promises only a survey of the progress of history, since the year 1789, dedicate several pages to a chronological enumeration of the historians of France from the earliest period, accompanied by a suitable panegyric on each, in order to show that France retained at all times" the palm of history."

We have already spoken of the invidious comparison instituted in this section, between their own and the English historians. It may not be without interest for our readers to have before them, the list of those whom they oppose so confidently to the Humes, the Robertsons, the Gibbons, the Clarendons, the Middletons, the Henrys, and the Fergusons. In enumerating their worthies, the Institute are compelled to acknowledge defects in some of them, which, together with others of a more serious nature not suggested, have in fact degraded their works

to a secondary rank, in the estimation of all impartial critics both at home and abroad.

"It was in the eighteenth century," says the Report, "that history was most assiduously cultivated in France, and that our writers distinguished themselves most conspicuously in this department. They have, in general, attracted their readers, by the merit of style, and have displayed more respect for truth, than the majority of their predecessors. We may cite from the number,-without speaking of Montesquieu* and Voltaire, who enjoy so much celebrity for their success in other departments of writing;-Pere Daniel, so estimable under many points of view, notwithstanding the censures which have been so deservedly pronounced upon him;-Velly and his continuators who have excelled Pere Daniel, principally because they were not Jesuits, and because they enjoyed assis tance of which he was deprived;-the judicious Abbé Fleury whose work the king of Prussia, Frederick II. did not himself disdain to abridge;-Rapin de Thoiras who made Europe acquainted with the history of England, when the English had no historians of their own;-Pere du Halde, the historian of the Chinese, who is accused, perhaps without reason, of having flattered them;-Rollin, a good writer, but rather too diffuse, and who is sometimes deficient in discrimination; -Dubos and Mably, who took such opposite views of the first ages of the French monarchy;-the Abbe de la Bléterie, who is guilty of some little affectation in his style, and le Beau, who is rather turgid;-de Guignes, who, in his history of the Huns, the fruit of immense labour, has comprised in great part, that of the East and the West;-Raynal, who has spoiled his work by unseasonable beauties, by rash conceptions, and by an almost continual affectation of philosophy;-Désormeaux, more to be commended for his "Abridgment of the History of Spain," than for his history of the House of Bourbon, in which all the princes of that house are metamorphosed into great men;-Mallet de Geneve, the author of a good history of Denmark, preceded by a very useful introduction concerning the history of the ancient people of the North, and particularly the Francs;-Hénault, Pfeffel, Don Clément, historical chronologists;-the Abbé de Condillac, whose "Cours d'Histoire," is so rich in thought;-the Abbé Millot, who succeeded so happily in the art of abridging; and others besides,

* We know not upon what ground it is that Montesquieu can be classed among the historians. As well might the same title be given to Adam Smith or to Warburton.

D

of whom, a nation less opulent in this respect than we are, and therefore less fastidious, would justly be proud."

Such is the galaxy of historians that, according to the Institute, illustrated France during the eighteenth century, and sustained the ascendency which she had previously enjoyed, in this species of composition, over the other nations of Europe. Those of our readers, who are capable of estimating, the real merits of Rapin and Raynal, and la Bléterie and de Guignes and the other champions of the French school, and who have had the patience to toil through their verbose, oppressive volumes, must be somewhat unwilling to admit the pretensions, which they are here declared to authorize. The English literature of the last century can in fact produce numbers, superior to these, in almost every leading excellence of historical composition;-a multitude of works, of but inferior repute, and consigned to comparative neglect, on which alone, England, if she did not possess the unrivalled chefs-d'œuvre of Robertson, and the others whom we have enumerated, might found a claim, at least to equality with her neighbour. -The French language can boast of no truly philosophical historian; of none that deserves to be classed in the same rank, with the great masters of the Scottish school. Raynal, who has given so lofty an epithet to his history of the two Indies, is execrable in almost every respect; insufferably prolix and declamatory; grossly incorrect and licentious in his narrative; unsound in his political morality; and full of the most extravagant hyperboles of sentiment and theory.

The travels of Anacharsis, by Barthelemi, of which the authors of the Report proceed to speak in some detail, although they acknowledge it to have been published in 1788, is indeed a work of the highest excellence, but cannot properly be said to belong to the department of history. It is sui generis, and unquestionably one of the most beautiful productions of the human mind. Although not without serious defects, it is to be regarded as a masterpiece of elegant literature, communicating the most valuable instruction in a more delectable shape, than any thing that has ever been written on the subject of the ancients.-It is already well known in this country, but never can become too popular, nor be too earnestly recom

The celebrated " Athenian Letters" for the first time given to the public at large, in 1798, might, with still greater propriety, be ranked under the head of history. Upon this work less extensive in the design, but perhaps more perfect in the execution, than the travels of Anacharsis, Barthelemi himself, in the Memoirs which he has written of his own life, pronounces a most exalted, and well-merited eulogium.

mended to the attentive meditation of the students not only of antiquity, but of the French language, in which it is a splendid model of diction.

Relegat qui semel percurrit
Qui nunquam legit, legat.

The following is a part of the just eulogium passed upon this work by the Institute. "The author instructs while he amuses the idle man, and affords a pleasant relaxation to the laborious; he instructs even the erudite, either by recalling to them what had escaped their memory, or by showing them certain objects under new aspects. It has been suggested that when he makes the Greeks speak, he often gives them a French air, and manners very nearly French; but it is known to all the learned, that his narrative is but a tissue of passages from Greek authors, interwoven with great skill, and translated with elegance."*

The description given by Barthelemi, in the twentieth chapter of his 2d book, of the manners and amusements of the Athenians, would strikingly apply to the Parisians.-Whoever has been in Paris, will be immediately reminded of several of the scenes which that capital presents, by the following passages from the chapter of Anacharsis, just mentioned.

"In the intervals of the day, particularly in the morning before twelve o'clock, and in the evening after supper, the Athenians walk upon the borders of the Ilissus and about the city, and enjoy the extreme freshness of the air, and the delightful views which present themselves on all sides; but, in general, they go to the public square which is more frequented than any other part of the city. As it is there that the general assembly is often held, and that the palace of the senate and the tribunal of the first Archon are situated, almost all the inhabitants are attracted thither, either by their own affairs or those of the republic. Many are seen there also merely for past-time, and others because they want some employment. At certain hours when it is freed from the incumbrances of the market, it offers an open field to those who wish to enjoy the spectacle of the crowd, or to mix in it themselves.

"In the vicinity ofthe square, are shops of perfumers, goldsmiths, barbers, &c. open to all, where they argue loudly upon the interests of the state, relate anecdotes of families, and talk freely of the vices and peculiarities of individuals. From the bosom of these meetings, which the impulse of the moment separates and brings together again without cessation, a thousand ingenious and sometimes biting sarcasms are sent forth, against those who appear upon the walk with a negligent exterior, or who do not fear to display there a revolting arrogance: for this people, fond of raillery to excess, employ a species of pleasantry so much the more formidable, as its malignity is carefully concealed. Sometimes a select company, and instructive conversation are found in the porticoes distributed throug' the city. This species of rendezvous has multiplied in Athens. Their insatiable love of news, the natural consequence of the activity of their minds, and the indolence of their lives, induces them to mix much with one another.

"This taste so animated which has given them the name of cockneys,* (badauds) gathers new strength in time of war. Then it is that in public, and

* V. ii. ch. 20. p. 303