i

THE

ECLECTIC REVIEW,

FOR APRIL, 1822.

Art. I. Memoires Historiques, Politiques, et Litteraires sur le Royaume de Naples. Par M. Le Comte Gregoire Orloff. Senateur de l'Empire de Russie. Publié avec des Notes et Additions. Par Amaury Duval. 5 Tom. Paris. 1821.

THERE

seem to be two modes of writing and of studying history. The obvious and beaten track is that which leads us along over the chronological series, to pause at the great and pregnant incidents, and to treasure them in the memory as matters of immediate or of future meditation. The other course is, to catch the spirit and character of successive ages, as they are imbodied in institutions, polities, and manners. But general and comprehensive histories presenting the order of events with clearness and fidelity, require and presuppose quick and penetrating understandings in those who undertake to read them. Enabled by right habits of intellectual culture to think for themselves, there are many minds which will derive from the facts that are presented to them, all that is instructive or useful, without having recourse to the subsidiary reasonings of other minds and other understandings. A more numerous class of readers, however, require something more. Wholly unable to arrest the fleeting and rapid succession of events, as it moves along, and throws its passing shadows on the stream of time,-needing something more than naked recitals, to supply them with materials of thinking, they find the aid of those historic disquisitions in which the task is removed from their shoulders, and not merely a train of reflection awakened in their minds, but specific reflections actually provided for them, indispensably needful. Necessity, therefore, has gradually introduced into this department of letters, a machinery wholly unknown in the first stages of historical writing. A simple process is at hand to extract the philosophy of history for those who are unable to extract it for themselves; and our kind neighbours the French have greatly facilitated the histoVol. XVII. N. S.

Ꮓ

rical studies of ladies and gentlemen by those essays or disquisitions in which Voltaire, Vertot, and Rollin have evinced, if not much profound learning, at least no inconsiderable share of skill and ingenuity. Such works fall in with that quiet indolence of mind which loves to repose on the deductions of others, and which, by satisfying itself with the best ready made opinions, is saved a world of painful and laborious meditation.

Among these sketches, essays, or disquisitions upon history, may be classed Count Orloff's Memoirs. They are, in fact, historical treatises upon that part of Italy, which constitutes the modern kingdom of Naples. They are divided into three parts. The first is strictly historical, and comprehends the whole circle of Neapolitan events from the earliest period of authentic history to the present time. The second part is dedicated to policy and legislation, and comprises that portion of the Neapolitan story which represents its social and political condition under the Roman domination, the revolutions of invasion and conquest, and the various and successive dynasties which influenced its polity and its laws. This extensive and multifarious abridgement concludes with a picture of the political condition of Naples in 1806, when the old government was subverted, down to the comparatively recent period at which the Author undertook his task. The third part is confined to Neapolitan literature, and embraces a wide circle,-the state of letters during the Greek and the Roman periods, during the middle ages, at the revival of learning, and in the present day.

It is obvious, that, with so extensive a plan, and so unlimited a range, the Author might, with an ordinary proficiency in the modern art of book-making, have constructed a work of much larger dimensions. We are thankful to him for his moderation. He must have been embarrassed with so ample a fund, and perplexed in the choice or rejection of his materials. Inopem me copia fecit. Such a work is a sort of drag-net, which, thrown over so wide a surface, must needs bring up in nearly equal proportions what it would be desirable to retain and what must be thrown away; and the taste and judgement of a writer are shewn by the value of the selection. We have a quarrel, however, with the arrangement of Count Orloff's work, and notwithstanding that, on the Continent, it has already attained popularity, we shall take the freedom of briefly stating our objections.

In the first place, we cannot bring ourselves to tolerate the distribution of the events of Neapolitan history separately from its policy and legislation, for they are subjects obviously not susceptible of being detached from each other. The history of a nation is its progress to political greatness; and how is that progress to be estimated without having under the eye as the

object of simultaneous reference, the laws which influence its manners, and the forms of policy on which its prosperity depends? A similar experiment in historical writing, has, it is true, been tried, with some success, by Dr. Henry, whose valuable work was warmly commended by Lord Mansfield when it first appeared, but since that time has been much neglected. It is by far the best specimen of this detached distribution. Yet, who does not feel in perusing it a perpetual interruption of the moral series, in having to pursue at distant intervals, and in distinct disquisitions, military, ecclesiastical, political, and civil details, and to collect historic information in portions so broken and disconnected? We have always thought that the summaries of Hume, affixed to the end of his volumes, betray a want of that lucid adjustment of his materials, which is the first virtue of an historian. With regard to literary history, the objection, perhaps, is not quite so applicable. Literature not being the every-day concern of human life, neither mixing itself with the bustle of the forum, nor the debates of the senate, may, even with some advantage to the general progress of historical recital, be considered apart from the rest of its incidents. It would introduce too frequent and too abrupt delays into the narrative, were the historian to attempt to combine the literary advancement of a nation with the general thread of his story. This part of Count Orloff's work, therefore, appears to merit a more unqualified commendation than we can award to the other two branches of his plan.

Literary history is an improvement of a somewhat modern date.

Lord Bacon mentions it as a desideratum in his time, But the history of Letters,' he says, must be classed amongst the desiderata. No doubt, indeed, the history of the world, when it is deprived of this branch of it, may be said to be not * unlike the statue of Polyphemus, which has no eye, and is, therefore, destitute of that which gives character and animation to the figure. Yet we are aware, that with regard to partienlar sciences, as, for instance, law, mathematics, rhetoric, 'philosophy, there are to be found a few slight sketches, and some jejune accounts of sects, schools, books, authors, and the revolutions which these sciences have undergone; and ⚫ that there are, moreover, extant a few meagre and imperfect treatises concerning the inventors of arts and improvements. A correct and comprehensive history of Letters, however, has not to this day been produced.'* He then proceeds to define the subject-matter and the method and uses of this branch of learning, with the characteristic force and clearness of his mighty genius. Since the time of Lord Bacon, however, lite

* De Augment. Scient. §. 2.

rary history has been by no means neglected. The voluminous labours of Brücker, which have left little to be desired as far as respects the philosophical department, and the more popular writings of Roscoe, Ginguené, and Sismondi in general literature, have contributed to fill up, in some measure, the outlines of the plan which was present to his almost intuitive comprehension, when he perceived and lamented the deficiency. As to these latter authors, so perfect is the sketch which they have given of Italian literature during the periods on which they have been respectively employed, that they might seem almost to have superseded this portion of Count Orloff's labours. If not, however, superfluous, we cannot help remarking that they are to a great extent redundant. His catalogue is in many respects much fuller than is warranted by the claims of the authors whom he commemorates; and the objections which have been brought against the fifth volume of Ginguené's work, which is for the most part filled with inferior and obscure names, apply with more justice to the barren enumerations of Count Orloff. He is so well disposed to be civil, a that, like Æneas in Virgil, he shakes hands to the right and left:

- amicum

Ilionea petit dextrâ, lævâque Serestum,

Post alios fortemque Gyan, fortemque Cloanthum.'

This description of literary history has been eloquently exposed by the most philosophical of modern critics. In literary histories,' says Schlegel, we too frequently observe writers of the same class and of the same nation, indiscriminately 'ranged by the side of each other, like the Assyrian or Egyptian kings in the ancient universal history. Some persons 'seem to have a passion for catalogues. They might, if they pleased, swell them out to a still greater extent, and compile whole books consisting merely of the titles of books. It is as if, in the narrative of a battle, we were to name every individual soldier who fought in the ranks; whereas it is quite suffi⚫cient to mention the heroes and commanders who distinguished themselves by their achievements. The human intel'lect in like manner obtains its victories by a small number of great men, and it is enough to confine our observations to what their genius has effected. The progress of science, and 'the gradations of letters, are necessarily comprised in the history of a few original and creative minds, described with "clearness and fidelity.' Examples of this jejune and unpro fitable enumeration of the ignobile vulgus of literature and science, occur too frequently in this branch of Count Orloff's work, to render it what it might easily have been made, the