examines the causes which occafioned the revolt of the Maltese; and details the particulars of the blockade and furrender of Malta to Great Britain.

It is fingular enough, that whilft he enumerates the exceffes committed by the French army, fuch as the plunder of their churches, the impreffing and carrying off to Egypt numbers of the inhabitants to serve in the army and navy, &c. he enters (p. 82.) into a formal vindication of their Commander in Chief;-this is the only part of the work where we have met with the name of Bonaparte, and it is mentioned with refpect.--Does this proceed from the excefs of the chevalier's charity and forgiveness? or does he look for the restoration of his Order to the person who overthrew it?

Such are the outlines of M. de Boifgelin's book. If, from the nature of the work, we did not expect much originality, we at least hoped for a perfpicuous arrangement of facts; but even as a compilation this book is deftitute of merit; and throughout we meet with numberlefs paffages of confiderable length, which are literally tranfcribed from the authorities. The little work, entitled, Malte, par un Voyageur François, is completely incorporated in the first part of the work: and Malta illuftrata and Vertet have afforded the chevalier many paffages.

We have already faid, that the effential information contained in the work might have been comprised in one octavo volume; but we may fafely add, that the work as it now stands, when ftripped of its appendix, its pompous catalogue of authorities, and other useless et ceteras, would not have exceeded the bounds of one moderate quarto. The chart of the islands is abfurdly large. Had it been executed on a fcale of one tenth of its prefent fize, it would have answered the purpofe equally well, without unneceffarily fwelling the first volume to an inconvenient bulk. The fubjects of the plates are in general ill chofen, and very badly executed. The coftumes of the inhabitants, and views of the island, would have been more interefting to the reader than portraits of the Grand Masters. The only original thing in the book, and al moft the only amufing one, is the author's zeal for his Order, and his anxiety that the island should be restored to it. Is it poffible that any man of common fenfe fhould fail to fee, that the inftitution has already outlived its utility, and is daily becoming ridiculous? It would not be more abfurd, to give an ifland to a lodge of Free Masons, than to such a corporation as the Knights of Malta.

ART.

ART. XVII. The Hiftory of France, from the time of its Conqueft by Clovis, A. D. 486. By the Rev. Alexander Ranken, D. Ď. one of the Minifters of Glafgow. Vols 1. 2. & 3. London. Cadell & Davies, 1801, 1802, and 1804.

THOUGH the records of every man's own country are thofe which he reads with most curiofity and delight; yet, confidering the matter as citizens of the world, and divefting ourselves of local partialities, we cannot conceive that the hiftory of any European nation can enter into competition, in point of interest and impor tance, with that of France. If we look at the other states of the continent, fome of them have come into the vineyard as it were at the eleventh hour, and were barbarians but the other day; fome again have long ago run out their race of fame, and protracted from age to age an exiftence of gradual decay; fome have never cultivated letters, and others never been great in arms; fome have been too miferable to produce legiflators, and others too happy to breed heroes; fome have had meagre annalists to chronicle great exploits, and others great hiftorians to record their petty tranfactions. But, as the duration of the French empire for thirteen centuries far tranfcends the credible history of any other ftate; fo the events by which that period is filled up, are more various and important, have been related by more numerous and agreeable writers, and given fcope to the talents and virtues of more diftinguished men, than any other; while the subject prefents a ftill more interefting fpectacle to the British philofopher, as the fource from which much of our polity and jurifprudence, much of our literature, and almost the whole of our fyltem of manners, has been derived. No man can set up a claim to the title of a literary or philofophical antiquarian, who has not drank pretty largely from the copious ftream of French hiftory; a ftream fo copious indeed, that the most diligent among the learned natives themselves have never been able, even in its partial branches, to exhaust it; and it is certainly an undertaking of no ordinary boldness in the author of the work before us, to promife the public a history of France, comprehending not civil and military tranfactions alone, but the religion, jurifprudence, learning, arts, commerce, language, and cuftoms of every age, from the invafion of Clovis. It will be readily feen, that the plan of this work correfponds with that of Dr Henry in his Hiftory of Britain. Dr Ranken fhall speak for

himself.

"Many years have elapfed fince I began my enquiries into French hiftory, and to write effays upon that fubject. The plan which I pre

VOL. VI. NO. 11.

ferred

ferred when I refolved to publish, required both that these effays should be confiderably altered in their form, and that others more recently composed should be added: this will account for that variety which may appear in the ftyle. The plan was not fuggefted by Dr Henry's Hiftory of Great Britain; but in attempting to arrange the feveral effays afterwards, a fimilarity was obferved; and on farther deliberation, I refolved to adopt his plan, and proceed in compofing what was then wanting to complete it. I admire his work, and will be content if 1 fhall be thought to have fuccefsfully imitated it.'

There are three methods which an hiftorian may pursue with respect to thofe great fubjects, of laws, manners, and the reft, which are fo much more interefting, for the moft part, than a mete narrative of tranfactions, and for the fake of which alone, in many periods, civil tranfactions are worth knowing. He may interweave them with the body of his narration, either incidentally, as Herodotus, Froiffart, and moft writers of contemporary hiftory have done, or by way of illuftration, like the greater part of modern writers; or fecondly, he may ftation them in preliminary books, or referve them for appendixes, wherever they bear only a general connexion with the main body of the work, ftill purfuing the former method, where it is effential to difcufs the causes, or elucidate the circumstances of particular events. Such is the plan of Robertfon in his Charles V. and of Hume, in his Hiftory of England. The arrangement of Gibbon is compounded of these two kinds, but partakes much more of the former. The third fcheme of difpofition is that of Henry and Dr Ranken; in which every diftinct fubject forms a distinct chapter, and the correfponding chapters in each fucceffive volume may be read as a continued independent account of the matters to which they relate.

Of these, the first is beyond comparifon the most pleasing to thofe who read hiftory as a fource of amufement. The fatiguing monotony of battles and fieges in war, cabals and negotiations in peace, fo palls upon the mind in almost every hiftorical work, that intermingled paffages, which illuftrate laws, literature, or manners, fhew like Oafes in the great defert, and afford reftingplaces to the weary reader, from which he may launch out again refrefhed into the tedious wildernefs which he is traverfing. These paffages are in many of the beft authors the more precious, that they are very rare. Man, fo ftudious to record his crimes and his miferies, cafts a carelefs eye, it would feem, upon the laws which protect, the arts which adorn, and the commerce which enriches him. It was not indeed till lately, that the great and leading ufes of hiftorical knowledge feem to have been well understood, or that philofophy, with Montefquieu as her high prieft, taught us to confider the progrefs of the fpecies, as of more im

portance

portance than the pedigree of kings, and commiffioned those painful, though fometimes refractory drudges, the antiquarians, to labour as her pioneers in the collection of facts, which her more favoured fons muft afterwards combine and generalize. Hence, in our modern hiftories, the fubjects of which we have been Speaking bear a much greater proportion to the main branch than ufed to be the cafe; and for that reafon cannot so easily be incorporated with it, without diftracting us by frequent transitions, lofing that time which is required to recal our ideas, and bring our minds to the proper focus, and rendering it difficult either to refer to particular paffages, or to ftudy collectively any particular fubject.

To this confused, immethodical difpofition, the third plan, that of the work before us, is completely oppofed. It seems indeed at first to be the very antipodes of confufion: every genus has its chapter, and every fpecies its fection. Yet we queftion whether this extreme accuracy of arrangement does not fometimes defeat itself. Many facts are to be found, of which we cannot well fay whether they should be referred to the civil or ecclefiaftical departments, to the history of science or of art. Thus, the difputes between Henry II. and Becket are related by Dr Henry under the head of Religion, (vol. 3. ch. 2.); while the excommunication of Robert King of France, A. D. 997. is placed by Dr Ranken (vol. 3. p. 21.) in the chapter deftined to Civil and Military Events. But what is more material, there is great danger that too rigorous an adherence to the fyftematic divifion may produce a jejune fpiritlefs performance, fine fucco et fanguine, a mere anatomy of hiftory, more refembling the dry precifeness of an index or chronological table, than a skilful and harmonious combination of the feveral parts of the work. Such is, perhaps, in fome degree, the cafe with Dr Henry's production, but eminently fo with the present history. Another objection is, that a larger field is entered upon, than any one man can reasonably hope to explore; and that the writer is naturally induced, by the very difpofition which he adopts, to dwell with unneceffary minutenefs upon many fubjects, which, as they reflect little light upon civil history, and furnifh little towards philofophical views of the fpecies, ought to be feldom and flightly noticed. Such are long details of theological fchifms and herefies, which properly fall under another province, and impofe a needlefs obligation on the writer, the fulfilment of which will perhaps excite the gratitude of few of his readers. Such too is the hiftory of language, a fubject extremely interesting in itself, but, for the fame reasons, rather injudiciously min gled with very different matter. Such too, but much worfe, is the head of Biography, which Dr R. has introduced into his two 02 former

former volumes, but has prudently retrenched in the third. When we found seven and a half pages allotted to the life of Sidonius Apollinaris, and eleven to that of Hincmar, we trembled at the proportional extent of these articles, when Dr R. fhould arrive at the times of Thuanus, Corneille, and Des Cartes.

The fecond of the three methods above pointed out is, therefore, the one which we confider as beft fuited to the greater part of hiftories. In the standard works of Hume and Robertson, while the chain of events is never broken in upon by long differtations, the narrative is agreeably varied and perfpicuoufly illuftrated by occafional digreffions, and the general views of the state of fociety are introduced in their proper places, without a tedious accuracy, or an attempt to exhauft materials of an indefinite extent.

After this criticifm on the plan of Dr R. it remains to see, whether he has adequately fulfilled what he has undertaken. There are two kinds of merit to which an hiftorian may aspire. The first and rareft, is to exhibit a luminous picture of human nature in the age and country upon which he is employed, to point out the caufes and refults of public tranfactions, to deduce principles of general policy and moral philofophy, to diftinguish the effects of what may be deemed accident, from the permanent and effential operations of general caufes. The fecond is, to accumulate facts with diligence, to felect them with judgment, to fift them with impartiality, and to relate them with perfpicuity. To the former of these excellencies, it is perfectly evident that Dr R. has no pretenfions he is neither a Machiavel nor a Gibbon: the statesman will not be guided by his maxims, nor the philofopher enlightened by his fpeculations. It would be much, however, if he had merited the praife of diligence and accuracy; we regret to fay, that we have found him somewhat deficient in this refpect alfo.

The first volume contains the Hiftory of France from Clovis to the death of Charlemagne. I have not attempted,' fays Dr R. in his preface, to carry the Hiftory of France farther back than the conquest of it by Clovis.' He has thought it neceffary, however, to deviate confiderably from this rule, and prefents us, in almost every chapter except the firft, with copious accounts, not only of Gaul during the Roman dominion, but, as we shall fee, of the Romans themselves. In the very outfet, we have a calculation of the populoufnefs of ancient Gaul at the æra of Cæfar's invafion. Upon this fubject we had prepared fome observations, which we are obliged to fupprefs for want of room; and can only fay, that, on the whole, we confider Dr R.'s eftimate as quite hyperbolical, and unfounded. If the effay of Hume had not long fince convinced us, the late work of Mr Malthus would have put

it