his ideas: but he may be a good logician without perplexing himself greatly about it; for we know that it has too often proved a source of affectation, and of deception, rather than the friend of truth. Mr. Collard must, however, be allowed to have employed great attention on the subject, and to have manifested ingenuity in the inquiry. His work may be read with pleasure, and may contribute not merely to amuse, but also to assist and improve the mind, though the syllo gistic form should not be regarded as of any considerable moment. Art. 54. Anecdotes of the House of Bedford, from the Norman Conquest to the present Period. 8vo. pp. 284. 5s. Boards, Barr. 1797. A mere genealogical detail, unbolstered by anecdote, would probably find an interest with few readers; for, in ever so remote a deduction of family history, individuals so nearly resemble each other, or participate in so limited a degree of national concerns, that tɔ compile a work professedly treating of a single house, as in the present case, is, in fact, encroaching on general history. Not to call such unavowed debts to popular historians a needless repetition, we must observe that we expected at least accuracy in the pedigree, novelty in the anedotes, and impartiality in respect of the characters. The professed object of this work, however, is to vindicate the claims of the Russells to a much higher degree of ancestry than that allowed to them by a splenetic writer, as the truly great Mr. Burke is here styled. A sketch of the character of William the Conqueror, certainly neither new nor pertinent, introduces the name of Hugh Russell, with four immediate descendants in a right line; concerning whom we have no plausible document; for the most authentic pedigree of that family, compiled by Philipott, and followed in the peerages both of Collins and Edmonson, deduces them from a progenitor of the 12th century. Sir John Russell, Speaker of the House of Commons in the reign of Henry the Sixth, was of the Russells of Strensham in Worcestershire, -a family of higher antiquity than and totally distinct from the House of Bedford. Of this noble line, most of the individuals are very cursorily mentioned; while the first Duke, his excellent Son, and the last bearer of these honours, engross, with wide digression, the bulk of the work. We are surprised to see the author falling into so common an error, both in the introduction and in pp. 123. 152, as that of styling William Lord Russell (by courtesy) Lord William;' which, as heir apparent to the Earl of Bedford, he could not be ; the Earl was not advanced to the Dukedom till after the execution of his son. As a specimen of the style, (not an unfavourable one,) we subjoin a prophetic character of his present Grace of Bedford. Not sufficiently acquainted with the conduct or manners of his Grace to delineate what he is,-we shall conclude with a sketch of what a DUKE OF BEDFORD may be :-" Born to the highest rank, splendid fortune, and a glorious name-deriving from the first a con a *We shall not now be charged with adulation in using so high an epithet; as the very uncommon personage here named is no longer capable of enjoying the savour of incense, offered from any quarter. stitutional stitutional claim to respect, from the second a natural extensive authority, and from the last raising an expectation of hereditary virtue; -the use he may make of such advantages may be honourable to himself, and beneficial to mankind. Conscious of his own weight and importance, his conduct in Parliament will be directed by nothing but the constitutional duty of a Peer. He will consider himself as the natural guardian of the laws. Willing to support the just measures of Government, but determined to observe the conduct of Ministers with suspicion, he will oppose the violence of faction with as much firmness as the encroachments of prerogative. He will be as little capable of trafficking with a Minister, as of mixing in the intrigues of Opposition. Whenever an important question shall call for his opinion in Parliament, he will be heard by the most profligate Minister with deference and respect. His authority will either sanctify or disgrace the measures of Government. The people will look up to him as their protector; and a virtuous Prince will have one honest man in his dominions in whose integrity and judgment he may safely confide." The unqualified obloquy thrown on the political characters of the late Earls of Bute and Chatham appears to be the only extenuation offered by this author, for the errors in administration which were so universally laid to the charge of the late Duke of Bedford. We cannot but observe such palpable inaccuracies as the following: • On his arrival at Court, Mr. Russell was na urally introduced to the King; who, finding his accomplishments both natural and acquired,' &c. p. 14. enjoyed too indifferent a state of health,' p. 155. and p. 188 friviously; a word not to be found in our language. . In a work intended for popular acceptation, though the public. may not justly expect all the beauties of style, they will scarcely dis pense with a want of common correctness. CORRESPONDENCE. Marcellus observes that we some time ago mentioned, in our Corre spondence, that a new translation of the works of Sallust was in preparation, and that he understands the name of the intended author to be Dr. Stuart: but that, having heard nothing more of the design, he wishes to be informed whether it is in forwardness, or has been abandoned : as, in the latter case, he knows where the work would readily and ably be undertaken.' We cannot answer this inquiry, but probably some of our Correspondents, or Dr. Stuart himself, may be able and willing to satisfy Marcellus. Cantabrigiensis reminds us of the editions of Tacitus and Livy, which were published under the inspection of the late Mr. Henry Homer. We have indeed accidentally overlooked them, but we shall shortly take that notice of them which is their due. In the last Review, p. 335. l. 4. for 'families,' read family's. TO THE TWENTY-THIRD VOLUME OF THE MONTHLY REVIEW ENLARGED. FOREIGN LITERATURE. ART. I. Einleitung ins alte Testament, &c. i.e. An Introduction to the Old Testament. By JOHN GODFRED EICHHORN. 4 Vols. pp. about 600 each. Leipzig. 1787-1795. 8vo. WH HEN we inform our readers that the author of this work succeeded to the celebrated Michaëlis as divinity-professor at Göttingen,-and that he may be said to rival his great predecessor in erudition, and to surpass him in critical sagacity and liberal investigation, we shall probably excite in them' that attention to the present publication which its importance seriously demands. These four volumes were published at various times: the first (and ours is not the original edition) bearing the date of 1787, the last that of 1795. The plan of the author is now completed; and the work comprises an introduction to each of the writings comprehended in the Old Testament. The great influence which these books have had on the culture of modern nations, especially since the Reformation, must confer on them an high importance in the eye of the magistrate; and the very early accounts which they contain of the progress of religion. and civilization, in countries which seem to have been the cradle of the human race, must for ever render a close study of them essential to the philosophic character. The merely theological use, which has hitherto been generally made of them, has not a little impeded a just appreciation of these instructive reliques of antiquity: for, by seeking in them religious ideas alone, the attention has been withdrawn from a APP. REV. VOL. XXIII. most most valuable portion of their contents. One set of readers was too easily persuaded, not only that the religious notions of the Hebrews were originally communicated to them by supernatural means, but that they had been preserved and perpetuated among them by an incessant chain of miracles: while another set, startled at the improbable, incredible, and sometimes impossible character of these supposed interpositions; and taking it for granted that the histories really contained every thing reported to be found there, have indulged themselves in a licentious and contemptuous disparagement, which defrauded the Scriptures of their just rights to attention and to reverence, Certainly (continues our author) such thinking men would have reconciled themselves to these important monuments of human intellect, if but one expounder of their contents, if but one defender of their importance, had arisen to shew that the greater part of this miraculous and of this supernatural is not to be found in the books themselves, but has resulted from misunderstanding; from ignorance of language; from inattention to the mode of thought and of expression, which characterizes these in common with the other earliest productions of literature; from mis-apprehension of the spirit of the East; or from impotence of sympathy with the childhood of intellect, so as to view all things through a similar medium of imagination.' This long-awaited rational commentator Germany has found in her EICHHORN, and Britain in her GEDDES. The first chapter begins by comparing the infancy of the Jewish nation with the barbaric age of other countries similarly circumstanced: many resemblances are pointed out,, and good observations made on the character which may be expected to prevail in the sagas and other records of a rude people. The mode in which these compositions have been preserved is next a topic of inquiry; and a remarkable passage is mentioned (Deuteronomy, c. xxxi. v. 9. to 26.), in which the first account occurs of the foundation of a holy library among the Jews, or of compositions nationally interesting, being solemnly intrusted to the care of the priesthood. Some historical document is said to have been added by Joshua, c. xxiv. v. 26. to the books preserved in the ark. In i Samuel, c. x. v. 25. a similar addition is mentioned;-and it is highly probable that these public archives, at first carried about with, the ark, were ultimately deposited in a temple-library, when the magnificence, of Solomon had provided this national edifice. At least, the second temple had a library, (RELAND de Spoliis Templi, p. 51 and 76.) which was probably an imitation of the former; and the tradition is universal among the fathers, that one existed in the first temple. (AUGUSTIN de Mirab. P. 533, P. 533, says: Esdras, Dei sacerdos, combustam a Chaldais in archivis templi restituit legem.) Whether the autographs of Moses, of Joshua, and of Samuel, were written on materials sufficiently durable to be all extant in the time of Solomon: whether simple or ornamented transcripts were then made of them for the sacred repository; and whether these consecrated writings were saved by Jeremiah from the burning of the temple:-it is now impossible to ascertain. Yet it is more likely, in Professor EICHHORN's opinion, that the fragments which we possess of Hebrew literature formed but a small part of the original collection; and that the copies, whence these few remnants are derived, were separately preserved by private individuals who contributed such manuscripts as accident had left in their possession, towards replacing the scattered na, tional scriptures, when Nehemiah gathered together (2 Maccabees, c.ii. v. 13.) the acts of the prophets and the kings. Ezra had no doubt a principal merit in collecting and transcribing, for the use of the priesthood, these precious reliques; but tradition names five other persons (2 Esdras, c. xiv. v. 24.) as assisting in the task. The arrangement of these books appears from all times to have been in the main conformable to the present; as also their subdivision into three parts, the law (n), the prophets (D''), and the hagiographa (D); except that, the latter denomination being of more modern invention, this portion of the Scriptures is frequently designated by " the psalms" which open it. By prophets (nabi, vates) the Hebrews meant nearly the same as the Cimbric nations by their bards. The tenth and eleventh sections relate to the Hebrew tongue, very justly (we doubt not) ranked by the learned author among the dialects of the Semite, which is said also to comprehend the Aramic and the Arabic. This language, he next informs us, had attained in the time of Moses, its most polished form; and continued to be used during a period, according to his estimate, of twelve hundred years, down to the time of Malachi. So unprecedented a permanence of language, and among a people peculiarly remarkable for changing their residence and for various internal revolutions, appears to us in the highest degree improbable, not to say impossible. Let us suppose the family of Abraham to have brought their Semite language with them into Goshen; they will there have acquired so many Coptic words and ideas as to have quitted that country with a mode of speech nearly approaching the Ægyptian. This must have yet remained when Moses wrote. After the conquest of Canaan, the Hebrews must have adopted, along with the wives and idolatrous rites of the con L12 quered, |