his life in a village. If something be thus lost as to what we call taste, for which, under such circumstances, there can be no fixed standard or common centre, much is gained on the score of freedom and originality of sentiment. Opinion is energetically opposed to opinion, school to school, and by this collision, unexpected light is frequently elicited.-If the celebrated Wolf suggests, at Halle or at Berlin, an idea concerning an ancient author, which appears too bold, an antagonist immediately springs up at Copenhagen, Gottingen, Frankfort, Meissen, &c.-The whole of this classical public takes part in the discussion, and encourages the disputants; a number of learned journals disseminate their arguments, and on every side new light is thrown on the question, by anonymous essays from the ablest hands."

Z.

70

Travels in various Countries of Europe, Asia, and Africa. By Edward Daniel Clarke, LL. D. Part the First. Russia, Tartary and Turkey.

We know not that we ever experienced, as literary gourmands, a severer disappointment, than in the perusal of Dr. Clarke's Travels in Russia, which have been recently reprinted in this country from the English edition. In England, long before the volume was published there, we heard the most sanguine predictions, with respect to the delight which it was to afford universally. We were then taught to believe, that Dr. Clarke was preparing a banquet for the public, which would gratify the most fastidious palate, and win over the most splenetic epicure. Before the work itself fell into our hands, we had read the accounts given of it, in the journals of Great Britain; particularly those of the Quarterly and Edinburgh Reviews.-Our expectations were, indeed, somewhat abated, by the extracts with which we were furnished, and by the strictures of the Quarterly Review, which, however, although they detect many serious blemishes in Dr. Clarke, are, for the most part, in a strain of warm commendation.

In reading the critique of the Edinburgh Reviewers, we made every allowance, for the bias they were likely to receive, from the circumstance of their having, two years before, pledged themselves as it were, for the infallibility of their author, and from the perfect coincidence of his opinions, with those, which they had uniformly maintained, on the subject of Russia. We were quite aware that they must strongly relish any bitterness of invective against the Russian government and nation, after what they had advanced concerning both, in their review of Rulhiere's History of Poland; and particularly after the promulgation of the following sentiment contained in their 28th Number. “Considering how little the Russian power has shown itself capable of effecting for the salvation of Europe-how wretched is the state of its subjects under the Russian government-how trifling an acquisition of strength the common enemy could expect to obtain, from the entire possession of its resources; we acknowledge that we should contemplate with great composure, any change which might lay the foundation of future improvement, and scatter the forces of France over the dominions of the Czars!!!"*

* Review of Lord Sheffield, and others, on foreign affairs.

Notwithstanding our recollection, of the existence of such obstacles as these, to perfect impartiality on the part of the Edinburgh Reviewers, and the other discouraging circumstances we have mentioned, our hopes with regard to Dr.. Clarke, were sustained, by the singularly positive tone, and affectionate tenor, of their panegyric, on this long ordained apostle of light. From our personal knowledge of the Scottish critics, and our intimate acquaintance with their writings, we did not think that the feelings of party, or that preconceived opinions of any kind, would ever exert an influence over them, so strong and sinister, as to disarm, not only their usual severity, but their characteristic sagacity, and to betray them into such imposing encomiums as the following, on any but one, who possessed, at least an extraordinary share of merit. They state "that all they had anticipated from the adventurous spirit and known abilities of Dr. Clarke has been fulfilled;"-that "in a long and laborious progress through countries little visited, or much misrepresented by others, he has observed carefully, and often wisely;"-"has plainly and sensibly related his adventures;"-" has given a fair transcript of the impressions made upon him by what he saw and heard;""that he is extremely free from the sins of affectation;”—that they have nothing to reprehend in his book "but a few venial oversights," and to crown all," that he certainly unites more of the qualifications essential to his difficult calling, as a traveller, and proceeds in the compilation of his journal, and the digestion of his narrative, upon far sounder views of the nature of his duties, than any one whose labours had come under their notice!"

We did not imagine that those who themselves, as critics, undoubtedly combine "more of the qualifications essential to their difficult calling, and sounder views of the nature of their duties," than any others of our numerous fraternity, would have bestowed this "the highest meed of praise" for transcendent merit in any vocation, on an author not in some degree worthy of the boon; and have attached the most authoritative of recommendations to his writings, if these were not, in fact, finished patterns of scrupulous accuracy, and judicious composition. We were unwilling to admit, the possibility of this unhallowed allotment of their favours in any case, and particularly in one, where the point at issue, is of such vast importance, as whether, not simply a few individuals, but a whole nation, consisting of thirty millions of inhabitants, and claiming a place in the ranks of civilization, is to be considered as scarcely entitled to the epithet of human, and as wallowing universally, in the

vilest pollutions of the most sensual barbarism, and the most abject slavery; for such is the true amount of the charge which Dr. Clarke prefers against Russia, and which it is the object, of almost every paragraph of his work to confirm.

Under the impressions we have here stated, we took up the Travels of Dr. Clarke with unusual avidity, but had not read many pages, before we began to suspect, that we had been miserably deceived.-As we proceeded, our disgust increased, and after wading through the whole volume, we closed it with the conviction, that the author was the very reverse of what he is represented to be, by his Edinburgh friends. We found his work throughout, a malignant, elaborate and yet awkward libel against a whole people, of whom he, in fact, personally, had, if we may judge from the particulars of his own narrative, but little reason to complain, although he would fain exhibit himself, as the victim of their pretended ferocity and rapaciousness. We found him not only grossly deficient in common candour, in gratitude, and in manly sense, but in consistency, in method, in general scientific knowledge, in intelligent observation, and even in the vulgar merit of a tolerably good style:-filling his pages with the most puerile and slanderous anecdotes; falling into the most palpable and immediate contradictions; repeating verbatim in several instances, whole paragraphs of his coarse invective; outraging all taste and decency in a multitude of his phrases;-surfeiting the reader with peevish, jejune stories of his own fictitious martyrdom; violating, in fine, every rule of sound logic and fair accusation, by sweeping anathemas, and the most vague generalities.

We deemed all this the more extraordinary and unpardonable, as Dr. Clarke had enjoyed, in the space of eleven years, which elapsed from the period of his residence in Russia, until that of the publication of his work, full time to correct whatever inaccuracies of language or relation, might have crept into his journal in the haste of itinerary composition. He had wanted for none of the advantages, requisite to enable him to tranquillize his mind into a state of philosophical equity, to chasten the outré colouring, and to temper the excessive asperity, and immoderate latitude of censure into which he might have been originally betrayed, by what we would readily allow to be, excusable sentiments of indignation, however warm, on the supposition, that he had been really plundered and maltreated by the Russians, to the extent implied in his general declarations, although by no means proven in his few and equivocal examples of the fact. He had, besides, in the long interval we have mentioned, ample

leisure to recollect and describe, what he saw in Russia of a praiseworthy nature; to draw from his memory and to recite, in the benevolent spirit and with the ingenuous alacrity of a philanthropist, many more exceptions than the few he has so reluctantly and penuriously made, to his general accusation of superlative barbarism and depravity; for, common sense will not endure even the supposition, that, among a nation so populous as the Russian, and circumstanced as she has been for many years past, there is nothing to be extolled; scarcely a single instance of moral or intellectual worth; of ordinary refinement in manners or in feeling. So monstrous and incredible a tale can argue, in the person who would thus write or talk, nothing other than downright stupidity, or premeditated slander, or the most narrow prejudice. It must, in the estimation of all judicious men, defeat its own purpose, and recoil upon the narrator.

Our opinion of Dr. Clarke's book was so opposite to that of our brethren in England, that we could not but distrust even, as it were, the evidence of our humble intuition. We were, therefore, induced to consult some of the most intelligent and impartial of our literary friends, who had read the work with attention. We discovered that they concurred fully in our decision, and were no less indignant than ourselves, at the unparalleled license with which the author has availed himself of his character of a travelling antiquary, to vilify an immense people for the gratification of his private resentments, and at the hardihood with which he has attempted to mislead the British public, and the world, upon the strength of the repu. tation for general ability and knowledge, which he had so undeservedly acquired, by his proficiency in archaiological studies. In our estimate of the accuracy of his statements, we are moreover, guided by the information we have industriously collected, from other sources of at least equal authority. We allude to the previous narratives of English and other travellers, and particularly to the copious verbal accounts, we received in Paris, and in London, from men of the highest respectability, whose opportunities were much more favourable to correct observation than those of Dr. Clarke, and who, certainly, like ourselves, are very far from being disposed to exaggerate the merits, or to overrate the resources either of the Russian government or people.

We do not propose to adduce at present, any examples from Dr. Clarke's book, in support of the opinion we have expressed above, concerning its literary merits.-The undertaking would VOL. III.

K