of it! He has at least one merit-simplicity. Yes! I will assist him, be his Mentor, his preceptor;-but woe to the new Telemachus, if he disobey his English Minerva.

This political sally we have chosen, not more as a specimen of the author's style than as a tolerable evidence of the state of feeling in France with regard to the men and the measures of her present ministry.

CONTINENTAL LITERARY INTELLIGENCE.

Denmark.

A NEW Dictionary of Danish Synonyms has just appeared, by Messrs. Sporon, Heiberg, Smidth, and Müller.

Messrs. O. Thornson and Thomas Erslen, are about to give a Supplement to the Dictionary of Danish Literature, by Kraft and Ugeruss.

Mr. P. A. Heiberg is occupied with Sketches of his Life in France,' which will appear at Christiania.

The celebrated philologist Thorlacius, professor of eloquence at the University, died lately. He is succeeded by Mr. Madvig.

Mr. Arnesen is engaged with a Greek and Danish Dictionary, the first of the kind in Denmark.

A Dictionary of the Frisian language, by Mr. Fritzen, is in the press. It will be published at the expense of the Society of Belles Lettres.

Mr. Malling, Minister of State, and author of the celebrated work called Great and Good Actions of Danes and Norwegians,' which was translated into English and French, has departed this life.

Bröndsted and Villoison.—In vol. xii. of Hermes,' a German journal, edited by Dr. K. E. Schmid, an article appeared with the following title, 'Villoison and Bröndsted; a Supplement to the History of Plagiarism. It is worthy of attention, as it treats of a work equally known to the English, French, and German scholar, and of a man sufficiently celebrated throughout Europe to justify a suspicion à priori against the critic. This is Dr. P. O. Brondsted, agent of his majesty the king of Denmark at the papal see; and his work is, Voyages and Researches in Greece, published in German, French, and English, and dedicated to his majesty the King of Denmark.'

Before we enter on a minute examination of the critique in question, we will say a word of Mr. Bröndsted. Having in 1806 obtained the degree of master of arts in the university of Copenhagen, he, at the close of the same year, undertook a journey to France, intending to proceed afterwards to Greece. He spent two years in Paris, where the imperial library was open to him, and in 1809 repaired to Italy, whence he proceeded to Greece in the following year. Here, in company with many celebrated men, as Linckh, Haller, Cockerell, Foster, &c., he entered on researches, the fruits of which are contained in the work above-mentioned. In 1813 he returned to his native country; from which, seven years later, he again set out to revisit the Ionian isles, and having spent a year there, came home. He begins his work with these isles, the first volume containing a description of the isle of Ceos.

The criticism to which we would direct attention begins thus:-"This work is a plagiarism from the notices of Mr. Villoison*, written on the margin of the

* D'Ausse de Villoison visited the island of Ziaceos in 1785. After his death, in 1805, the imperial library became possessed of his papers, which are of the utmost importance.

edition

edition of Tournefort, and from his manuscripts, which form more than twelve quarto volumes...... From what Villoison says of Ceos, Brondsted has taken, without acknowledgment, his citations, conjectures, opinions, results, and even his faults of style and effaced passages. He quotes him thrice-once concerning another island, and the two remaining times in a note and in a supplement, in a manner designedly perverse and mutilated. We have inquired among men most calculated to form a judgment, and, according to them, it is more than probable that Mr. Brondsted employed the papers of Mr.Villoison, even before he set out: after his return, he made extracts from them, during several months, in the royal library.'

Such are the general accusations of the critic; and it must be admitted that, had they even verisimilitude, they would be sufficient to eclipse for ever the reputation of a man who enjoys so wide a celebrity. But Mr. Bröndsted has not been without defenders; and we will compare their statements with the charges brought against him, in order to arrive at a just conclusion between the author and his critic.

The first defence of Bröndsted appeared in a Danish journal, called 'Dansk Litteraturtidende,' edited by Professor P. E. Müller. But this defence, written in the mild tone which distinguishes the journal, is rather an excuse than a justification. Next was published a pamphlet, by Mr. Hage, entitled 'Brondsted and Villoison,' in which the writer, following the critic step by step, not only proves that Mr. Bröndsted is not guilty of the charge of plagiarism, but further adds that the critic is a base calumniator (niederträchtiges verläumder).

Without blindly following either party, we will proceed to notice the accusations of the critic, and the replications of Messrs. Müller and Hage.

The critic begins by a general assertion that Mr. Bröndsted has copied from Mr. Villoison his quotations from the ancient authors, concerning the topography and history of the isle of Ceos; and this he attempts to prove, by comparing several of the quotations. But, is it not absolutely necessary that two men tending towards the same point, when studying the ancient authors, should meet with and quote the same passages in numerous instances; or is it a fault in Mr. Brondsted, that he saw the light some thirty years later than Mr. Villoison?

As to the geography, the principal result is, that the ruins called "Taes Polaes,' which are found at Ceos, are not those of Iulis but of Carthaa. Tournefort had believed that they were the ruins of Iulis; but Bröndsted proves that they are those of Carthæa. The critic supposes that this idea was borrowed from Villoison, who quotes the passage from Strabo (x. 486) which had misled Tournefort. But why should this be so? Brondsted proves by inscriptions, &c., in the clearest manner, what was before only slightly conjectured, and has not confined his illustrations to this particular part of the island. He has also explained the site of Coressus, &c, &c.

'The chief result in the archæological part of this first book,' says the critic, is that the worship of Aristæos all over this island was joined with the worship of Apollo, and not with that of Jove;' and he believes that this opinion of Mr. Brondsted is taken from two lines of Æneas de Gaza, quoted by Villoison. But the critic is wrong: the chief result is the explanation of the worship of Aristæos at Ceos, and the critic omits what Brondsted has said on the worship of Jove, &c. which strengthens his opinions. The critic will have it that Brondsted has stolen even the nymphs of Ceos from Villoison, because both writers cite the same passage from Heraclitus Pontius: and he proves this charge as he does all the rest.

With regard to the notices of Mr. Villoison on the fine arts,' says the critic, Bröndsted has thought them so excellent, that he has not given an

abridgement,

abridgement, but has copied them at length.' In proof of this, he quotes the passage of Villoison: There is a large and enormous block of stone, carved as a lion, in the garden of Mr. N. Pangolo.' Brondsted gives a more detailed account; and why should he be forbidden to write what he himself has seen? The critic then continues, 'All that Bröndsted has said, concerning the name of Ceos has been drawn from the manuscripts of Villoison. The long note, pp. 56, 57, and 58, is specially devoted to this subject. In the second part of it he copies entire passages from Villoison, and sneers at the author; in the first he even copies what was erased in the original.' But how has Brondsted sneered at Villoison? Bröndsted says, On the name only of this island, which has been confounded with those of Kos, Chios, &c. one might write a dissertation, learned enough, but not very fruitful.' Villoison has already furnished matter for such a dissertation-ergo, Bröndsted sneers at Villoison. There is the logic of the critic.

Finally, the critic says; 'When Villoison is in doubt, Bröndsted says "perhaps;" but his emendations, whether confidently expressed or not, always belong to Villoison. It is unpardonable that Mr. Brondsted will never give this author the credit of his conjectures.' There is in fact so great a resemblance between one part of the conjectures of Brondsted and those of Villoison, that, though it is impossible to prove it, we think it not improbable that the former has, in this instance, copied from the latter. We admit, therefore, that Brondsted ought to have mentioned his authority; and this, we think to be the head and front' of his offending. But to bully a distinguished man, as this critic has done, is below the dignity of literary disputation. Still we cannot agree with Mr. Hage in the opinion that a malicious intention alone guided the pen of the critic. No: and we will go further, and contend that Mr. Hage cannot possibly prove, by any thing in this criticism, the serious invective put forward against the writer, when he calls him a base slanderer. What we do, however, reproach the critic with is this—that he dazzles his readers by throwing an odious light on Bröndsted, when he brings together quotations which are spread throughout the work, but which the reader is thus led to believe form a continuous whole.

The criticism concludes pathetically enough. By his "Travels and Researches in Greece," observes the critic, a work which deserves the first rank among plagiarisms, Dr. P. O. Bröndsted has unworthily deceived the most distinguished scholars in Europe-above all, the Académie des Inscriptions, the journals, and honourable editors, of Germany, France, and England-he has abused the good fortune which made the papers of Villoison known to him. As to his sovereign, he has not deceived him; for he tells him in his preface that a lucky accident rather than his own merit," has produced these numerous elucidations on the subject of Greece.-We could in fewer words have done justice to Villoison and unveiled the plagiary, had it not been necessary to make an example which perhaps will not be without its good effects for the knowledge of antiquity and for scientific truth.'

Oh, that the critic had never departed from scientific truth!

France.

FROM the statistic tables for the year 1826, published by the prefect of the department of the Seine, it appears that amongst a million of inhabitants there were 824 persons arraigned for different crimes; of whom 297 were acquitted, and 527 condemned.

It is doubtless interesting to the mental philosopher and the divine to remark the different ages of the accused; as shewing the periods of man's life when, from various causes, he is most or least liable to commit crime. Of the accused we find

Those

Total, 824

Of 527 persons condemned for the more heavy offences, there were 424 men and 103 women. Of these 527 criminals, 494 had simply stolen property, whilst 33 only had attacked the person. Upon this favourable proportion the French journals have wittily remarked, that the generality of their criminals seem to be more of financiers than men-killers, and that they are consequently fifteen times fonder of the money than the existence of their fellow-creatures.

--

Of 435 thefts, 145 were domestic ones; that is to say, committed in the houses where the offenders were engaged as servants, or otherwise trusted. The French remark with reason that this number is not by any means alarming or extraordinary, when we recollect the immense number of servants who, in the different capacities of coachmen, cooks, valets-de-chambre, house-maids, nurse-maids, to say nothing of occasional assistants, which latter are admitted into private houses on very slight credentials. Of these there are in Paris more than 40,000, nearly the whole of whom are supposed to be acquainted with the places where their employers keep the keys of their secretaries, &c., and with the valuables that may be contained in their drawers, wardrobes, and closets. Under these circumstances, it is certainly highly creditable to the body of persons so trusted that the number of their offences is not considerably larger.

Eight criminals were condemned for murder, and eight for that species of it which comes under the term assassination, or premeditated murder. Of these, six were perpetrated with knives; seven with swords, daggers, or other cutting or thrusting weapons; two by violent kicking and striking; and one with pistol shot.

As far as we have been able to collect from good authority, we do not hear that, since 1826, there has been any great increase of crime, notwithstanding, there has been a progressive increase of population. We shall take an early opportunity of referring to these reports, the state of which at present we have not been able to ascertain with accuracy.

University of France.-The lectures at the Sorbonne and the College de France recommenced in November. Those of M. Guizot and M. Villemain are interesting from the subjects they have chosen. The former delivers his present course on the history of the state of France during the middle ages. The latter is developing the state of the French language and literature during the same eventful period, including an account of the poetry and romantic exploits of the Troubadours. These two professors have the satisfaction of finding their theatres more crowded, if possible, than ever; and we are happy to remark that the other lecture-rooms are continually attended by a numerous and attentive audience.

Travels in Arabia Petræa.—Of the work entitled 'Voyage de l'Arabie Pétrée, par MM. Leon de La Borde et Linaut,' we have just seen the prospectus, and first livraison of plates, which were published at Paris about

the

the middle of last month (January). It is well known that curiosity has long been excited respecting the situation and remains of ancient Petra, once the capital of a great province, called by European geographers Arabia Petræa, but which, notwithstanding its celebrity in the sacred scripture, is yet almost unknown to us. The travellers who visited this region had no other object than the illustration of certain passages in the Old Testament, or the performance of a religious pilgrimage; they proceeded, therefore, no further than Mount Sinai. Three, however, more adventurous, taking their departure from Egypt, arrived at the fortress of Acaba, near the extremity of the Elanitic Gulf; but they soon retraced their steps, leaving unexplored the most interesting, and, it must be acknowledged, the most dangerous portions of this country. At length some travellers, coming from the north, were more successful, and we owe to them the discovery of those ruins in the Wadi Mousa, or Valley of Moses, which are recognized as the remains of the ancient city of Petra.

That patriarche des voyageurs Burckhardt, whom, under the Musselman name of Sheikh Ibrahim, every Arab esteemed for his amiable qualities and his intrepidity, was the first who penetrated so far as Petra; but various circumstances in his manner of travelling, prevented him from giving a full or satisfactory account of its remains. Some years after Burckhardt, Mr. Banks, accompanied by several Englishmen, forced his way, it may be said, to this spot; but as he was frequently obliged to act on the defensive, many difficulties opposed him in collecting materials for description, at least if we may judge from the documents furnished in the work of his companions, Messrs. Mangles and Irby. Finally, Mr. Anson and another gentleman visited the ruins of Petra, but it appears that they only passed through them.

More fortunate than their predecessors, and perhaps more favoured by circumstances, M. Leon de La Borde and M. Linaut succeeded not only in exploring the ruined city and its environs, but in delineating, for the first time, every monument, with all its details. Thus occupied, they spent among the ruins eight entire days, and prosecuted their researches towards the south of Wadi Mousa, over a space of twenty square leagues, which had not been previously visited by any European. Here they discovered the remains of a city, exhibiting a naumachia still in a state of good preservation; another city with an aqueduct three leagues in length; and various sites extremely interesting from their coincidence with the statements left by ancient writers. M. Leon de La Borde, after M.Linaut had left him, travelled alone over the mountains of Sinai, and his account of this last journey, and the drawings with which it furnished him, will be found eminently serviceable in illustrating the Old Testament.

To the work here announced, M. Linaut has contributed several drawings and plans of monuments. In this gentleman the African Association of London have found a worthy successor of the celebrated Burckhardt, and on their account he is now continuing his researches in Africa.

The Voyage de l'Arabie Pétrée' will form ten numbers, or livraisons, each consisting of five plates, .representing the monuments of Petra, and the most interesting scenes in the peninsula of Mount Sinai. The work also will comprise a general plan of Petra on a great scale, and a very detailed map of Arabia Petræa. M. Leon de La Borde has employed in executing the plates many artists of the first reputation for lithographic skill, and others, equally eminent, will evince their powers in the maps and plans. We have already mentioned that one number was published last month; the other nine portions are to follow in monthly succession. Of each the price is fixed at twenty francs; and an octavo volume of letter-press, with vignettes and an atlas of maps, will serve to explain the fifty plates. The price of this volume to be twenty francs.

The five plates which we have inspected are of a very large folio size, and beautifully