reading a series of the most contemptuous and insulting observations that were ever penned. We have already enabled our readers to appreciate the talents of this "Critic" and "Philosopher:" and we should feel degraded in our own estimation, to enter upon a defence of the professor against so puny and malevolent an assailant.

IN reading the title of this work, we were induced to expect, what we have often wished to see ably executed, a treatise designed to vindicate, on rational and philosophical grounds, the present importance of classical literature, to deli. neate its branches, subjects, and extent, to open and clear its sources, to develope some of the more important canons of criticism, and by these means to lay a solid foundation for the ultimate improvement of the young and ardent disciple of literature, who is making his entrance upon these interesting fields of study. In such a work, to the bibliotheca of ancient writers, which would necessarily compose a part of it, we should expect to see joined a second bibliotheca of those grammarians and critics, to whose acuteness and labour the classic writers owe the principal part of their elucidation, and their restitution to a state of considerable purity, from the numerous stains and debasements which they had contacted in their passage through ignorant and barbarous ages.

Perhaps the word "Commentaries," adopted in the title-page, with which the idea of something profound and recondite is in popular use associated, led us to expect, in the treatise of Mr. Urquhart, a work of the nature which we have described. The author, however, in the commencement of his enquiry, cautions his readers to expect no laborious investigations, or acute observations of criticism, since his only purpose was to enforce an important truth, the utility of a liberal education to individuals and society. In his first chapter, he forms an estimate of the utility of classical literature to the various professions and orders of society, after which introduction the remainder of his work is occupied by an arranged description of the principal writers of Greece and Rome, including slight notices of their biography, and ANN. REV. VOL. II.

some general criticism on the various characters of their composition. The arrangement and many of the observations are taken, we are told, from La harpe; and in fact, though the passages thus borrowed are not distinguished, the style of a French critic is often discernible.

Though Mr. Urquhart has employed sixty-five pages in arguing the impor tance of ancient learning, we are of opinion, that comparatively little of this matter is strictly applicable to his pur pose. He seems to consider, with a few exceptions, arts and sciences, politics and morality, as included in the discoveries and incorporated with the writings of the ancients. Hence we are to learn, that "the claims which our kindred have upon our affections are subordinate to the claims of our country." Hence the student of medicine is to derive his precepts, and here the painter to seize the ideal perfection of his art.

We are as little disposed as Mr. Urquhart to depreciate the genuine valué of classical literature: we gratefully acknowledge that the improvement of the moderns results from the energies and exertions of the ancients; the day is, however, now past, when the ancients were our legitimate instructors in science. Still the enlightened study of their writings is highly delightful and ornamental, their languages remain exquisite specimens of skill, accuracy, and beauty, the acquisition of which is a most valuable discipline to the mind, their works are monuments of inestimable importance in the history of mankind, and those persons, if any such there are, who would wish to consign them to oblivion, would be a second race of Goths and Vandals.

Mr. Urquhart speaks of these "precious relics as at first casually found, and now happily secured from farther ruin." This however, except in a few

Tt

instances, is an incorrect statement of the fact. The chain of learning, though much attenuated, was never broken. We know that a very few centuries previous to the invention of printing, works of the greatest value were in being, of which scarcely a vestige can now be found.

The subject of the second section is the epic poetry of Greece, the writings of Homer, Hesiod, and Apollonius Rho dius. There certainly is a sense in which Hesiod may be styled an epic poet, as the readers of Dr. Bentley's remarks on Phalaris well know; in the modern use of the terms, he would, however, be classed with didactic writers. From this section, we select part of the criticism on the Iliad, as a specimen of the work.

hin.

enemy.'

there is a variety, and in the relation of it að energy, which are produced by elevation of genius; and his verses, which delight the ear by their rythm and their cadence, deno

inate him the true poct of nature.

"In reading the twelve first books of Hemer, we are struck with the simple yet noble progress of the work. We admire the artifice of the poet, who suffers the intervention of the gods to terminate a battle between Menelaus and Paris, which must otherwise have terminated the war. Our attention is summoned to that part where Helen passes before the old Trojans, who regard her with admiration, and are no longer astonished at seeing Europe and Asia bleeding on her account. Her conversation with the aged Priam, when she makes known to him the principal chiefs of Greece, is particularly interesting. The scene between Hector and Andromache when the hero returns to order a sacrifice, and then departs from Troy never to re-enter it, has not been celebrated too often or too much.

"These are delightful episodes, which agree ably vary the uniformity of the principal

action.

From the epic poets, Mr. Urquhart proceeds to the lyric, tragic, comic, and pastoral poets of Greece; and to its orators and historians. Plutarch claims a separate section, and a concluding sec. tion is allotted to the Grecian satire, that is, to the works of Lucian. A similar plan, with some variations of order and circumstances, is pursued in the enumeration of the Roman writers. But why, among the Greeks, is Callimachus forgotten? Why are the didactic poets omitted, Aratus, Nicander, and Oppian? How is the glory of Plato and Aristotle

so obscured that their names are not mentioned? Did the work of Atherzus deserve to be unnoticed? Could no proper place among the Roman writings be discovered for the great work of the elder Pliny? By a strange anachronism, Bacchylides, the contemporary of Pindar, is made to flourish thirteen centuries before the christian æra. What is meant by the episode of Cacus, apparently ascribed (p. 363) to Lucretius?

We

The style is often inaccurate. are told that it was the plan of the Iliad to demonstrate the evils arising from discord among rulers; rather the object; the plan is the disposition which is used for the accomplishment of the object.

Speaking of Herodian, it is remarked that the imitation of his style is more desirable than difficult: we suppose, more desirable than easy. In comparisons of this kind, a little care is requisite to

avoid blunders. A similar error we have heard noticed in Sir Richard Steele's dedication of the first volume of the Spectator to Lord Somers: "the surprizing influence which is peculiar to you,

in making every one who converses with your lordship, prefer you to himself, without thinking the less meanly of his own talents."

"The first part of this work will contain á moral and philosophical analysis of Grecian and Latin literature; some reflections on the effects produced upon the human mind by the invasions of the northern nations, by the revival of letters, and by the establishment of the christian religion: a rapid delineation of the discriminative traits of modern literature,

with somewhat more detailed observations on

the master-picces in the Italian, English, German and French languages, considered agreeably to the general scope of the work, that is to say, with a view to the relations that subsist between the political state of a country, and the predominant spirit of its literature. I will endeavour to shew the particular character which eloquence assumes from this or that form of government; the moral ideas which this or that religious creed is calculated to beget in the hunian mind; and the effects of imagination that are produced by the credulity of certain nations; the poetical beauties that belong to the influence of climate; the degree of civilization that best promotes the strength and perfection of literature; the various changes that have been introduced into the art of composition, as well as into inanners, by the different modes of existence of women, before and after the establishment of the christian religion; and, finally, the universal progress of knowledge resulting from the mere succession of ages. These will constitute the materials of the first part.

"In the second, I will examine into the state of lights and of literature in France since the revolution ; and I will hazard a few conjectures respecting what ought and will be their future state, if we are one day to enjoy the possession of republican freedom and morality. The analogy of the past will lead me to a knowledge of what is yet unknown; and by re-stating the observations I will have made in the first part of this work, respecting the influence of a particular religion, a particular form of government, or particular manners and customs, I shall be enabled to draw some inferences relative to my supposed fiture state of things. In this second part will be seen, at once, both our present degradation and our future possible perfection. This subject must sometimes lead me to observations on the political situation of France for

these ten years back; but I shall touch on it only as far as it is connected with literature and philosophy, without diverging into any digression foreign to my general purpose.

As I survey the revolutions of the globe, and the succession of ages, one great idea is ever uppermost in my mind, from which I never allow my attention to be diverted, I mean that of the perfectibility of the human race. I cannot bring myself to think, that this grand work of moral nature has ever been abandoned; in the ages of light, as well as in those of darkness, the gradual advancement of the human species has never been interrupted.

with all the faculties of my mind. I see, "To this philosophical creed do I cling among its chief advantages, that it inspires an soul; and I appeal to every mind of a certain high sense of self-esteem, a lofty elevation of cast, if there be in this nether world a purer enjoyment, than that bestowed by this conthere are still moments, in which all these scious elevation? To it is it owing, that mean grovelling beings, with all their sordid calculations of self-interestedness, fade away and sink before our eyes. We raise and reinvigorate our faculties, by contemplating the future state of knowledge, of virtue and of glory: certain vague impressions crowd in upon us, and sentiments which we cannot well define, that alleviate the load of life, while the whole moral man swells with the of happiness. If all our efforts were to be pride of virtue, and swims in the overflowings. strained in vain, if our intellectual labours were to be exerted to no purpose, but irrevocably swallowed up in the oblivious gulph of time, where is the object which a virtuous man could propose to himself in his solitary meditations? For any part I have, throughout this work, incessantly reverted to every circumstance that tends to evince the perfectibility of the human species. Nor is this to the result of observation, and stands on the be confounded with visionary theories: it is evidence of facts. It is wise, indeed, to

guard against that sort of metaphysics that derives no support from experience; but neither should it be forgotten that, in times of degeneracy and corruption, the name of metaphysics is given to every thing that is not love, or that does not coincide with the calcircumscribed within the narrowness of selfculations of self-interest."

The first thought that will occur to

every man's mind in perusing the titlepage to these volumes, will be the prodigious confidence of the writer, not merely in her own talents, (of those Madame Stael has a right to be confident) but in her own extensive and omnifarious erudition. A Treatise on Ancient and Modern Literature! setting Eng. lishwomen aside, we believe, in our consci ence, that there is not a man in England who would be impudent enough to affix such a title to his book. But impudence is a word, whose meaning is subject to geographical modifications, and with little danger to morals, we may allow it to be under the influence of climate and situ. ation; what would be immodest in England, is not even indecorous in France. The baroness writes as volubly as she converses; this is often the case with our own countrywomen, but happily they do not think themselves at all times privileged to talk and to publish.

It cannot be supposed, that Madame Stael is acquainted with the subject upon which she writes; she can, however, reason upon it, as if, and probably as well as if she was. This trick of pretending to look for the philosophy of things, without understanding the things themselves, is one of the characteristics of the age. Young men catch a few metaphysical phrases and technical terms, and set up forthwith for philosophers; just as many a rascal, who can prepare a mercurial pill, advertises himself as a physician. This it is that has rendered metaphysics so common and so perfectly worthless: no preparatory study, no previous knowledge is required; as in the Cabala, a few words are sufficient to open the storehouses of science and na ture!

Not having the original work before us, we cannot always tell whom we are to accuse of ignorance, the authoress or the translator. It is probably Madame Stael who tells us, that "the monotony of the Pindaric hymns, which is so irksome and fatiguing to us, was esteemed quite the reverse at the Grecian festi vals:" of course, this lady must be a judge of Greek metres and Greek music! We are told that Euripides, a tragedy of Eschylus, had such an astonishing effect on the spectators, that pregnant women were fearful of the consequences that might attend their being present at its representation, but its terrors were those resembling the infernal regions." This complication of inaccuracies must

exist in the original. "Death held forth a much less gloomy aspect to the anci ents than to the moderns; their belief in paganism calmed their fears, by representing a future state in the most bril liant and pleasing colours." This also is Madame Stael's mistake; she has read Homer, and forgotten the ghost of Achilles. But when we see that Alcestis is, in one sentence, made of both genders, and in another find Eschylus mentioned as living after Sophocles and Euripides, we perceive that the translator is even more ignorant than the writer. This last passage is a complete specimen of mistranslation.

"There is a very visible improvement in cles, and Euripides; there is even too much the three great tragedians, Eschylus, Sophodistance between Eschylus and the two latter, to be able to account for his superiority by the natural progress of the human mind, in so short a space of time; but Eschylas had seen nothing but the prosperity of Athens, Sophocles,and Euripides beheld their reverse, their dramatic genius was brought forward and ripened, calamity has its fecundity; no works of Eschylus, he scarcely ever unites the sufferings of the body with those of the mind by any reflections."

moral conclusion can be drawn from the

It must be the translator also who says, that the comedy of Nurees prepared the minds of the populace for the accusation of Socrates. We know not which of the two has been erudite enough to rank Tacitus among the Greek historians. Such blunders as Regner, Lodbroy, and Sopes de Vega are probably English. These volumes have no errata, and we are left to guess at the meaning of such inexplicable riddles as the following: "Persecutions, calumnies, sufferings of every hue, would become the lamentable lot of those who boldly think and soundly torealize."

The praise of style is also to be divided between the French and English writer. "The whole moral man swells with the pride of virtue, and swims in the overflowings of happiness." This Persian flower has been reared in a French hot-house."With what fine bursts of indignation has not the aspect of Crime filled the mouth of Eloquence !" This too is exotic eloquence; but when we read of "mistress cities," of "the sound writings of accomplished wits," and find esprit every where rendered wit, the vile and vulgar phrase must not be imputed to Madame Stael,

The chapter upon the philosophy of the Greeks, is a most astonishing specimen of female effrontery.

"The minds of the Greeks were entirely engrossed by the study of the different systems of the world; the smaller the progress they had made in science, the less they were acquainted with the extent of the human understanding; that of the philosophers must be pronounced very confined in what was Considered deep, and at all inexplicable. Pythagoras declared, "that there was nothing real but what was spiritual, and that the material had no existence." Plato, whose imagination was so brilliant, ever returns to whimsical metaphysics, relative to men and to love, where the physical laws of the universe, and the verification of sentiments are never observed. There is nothing more irksome and fatiguing than the study of that species of metaphysics, which has neither facts for its foundation, nor method for its guide; and it is surely impossible not to be convinced of this truth, in reading the philosophical writings of the Grecks, norwithstanding we fully admit the beauty of their language.'

"The Greek philosophers were very limited in numbers, and being unable to obtain any assistance from the light of former ages, they were compelled to make their studies universal; it was therefore impossible for them to proceed to a great length in any one of them, and they wanted that method which can only be acquired by an accurate knowledge of the sciences.

"Plato could not have arranged in his memory, that which the aid of method enables the young men of modern times to do with the greatest facility."

Reader! it is a Frenchwoman who tells us this of the Greek philosophers, who assures us that Aristotle was truly great, considering the age in which he lived; i. e. considering that he had the misfor tune to be born an Athenian, not a Frenchman! and who informs us that the Greek historians never connected their ideas with causes. "You are a very simpli

city 'oman! 'Oman art thou lunatics? For shame 'oman.”

Of the dark ages, Madame Stael of ture she knows little; of Spanish less. course knows nothing; of Italian literaConcerning the literature of the North, she shall deliver her own hypothesis.

"There appears to be two distinct kinds. of literature still extant, one derived from the east, the other from the north; the origin of the first may be traced to Homer, that of the last to Ossian.* The Greeks, the Latins, the Italians, the Spanish, and the French of the century of Louis XIV. belong to that style of literature which I shall call the cas tern. The works of the English and German, with some of the Danish and Swedish writings, may be classed as the literature of the north. But before I attempt to characterise the English and German writers, I think it necessary, in a general manner, to consider the principal difference of the two hemispheres of their literature.

"The English, as well as the Germans, have, without doubt, often imitated the an cients, and drawn very useful lessons from that fruitful study, but their original beauties, carrying the stamp of northern mythology, have a certain resemblance to that poetic grandeur, of which Ossian is the most splendid example.

"It may, perhaps, be remarked, that the English poets are celebrated for the spirit of philosophy which appears in all their works, and that the ideas of Ossian are not the ideas of reflection, but a series of events and impres sions. I answer to this objection, that the most habitual images and ideas of Ossian are those which recall the shortness of life, the respect for the dead, the superstition connected with their memory, and the duty that remains towards those who are no more. If the poet has not united to those sentiments, morals, maxims, or philosophical reflections, it was because the human understanding at that period was not yet capable of the abferences; but the emotion caused by the to draw philosophical insongs of Ossian, disposed the mind to the most profound meditations.

straction necessary

"Melancholy poetry is that which accords