[ i6 ] 



could have juftified my calling the attention of this revered 

 affembly to a queftion fo remote, and feemingly fo uninterefting. 

 Always, as I have faid, has that hiftorian appeared to me to be 

 over-rated ; the indecency of his defcriptions has been often con- 

 demned, and it was well obferved, that Suetonius wrote the 

 lives of the Emperors with the fame licentioufnefs with which 

 they lived. Were I to compare Suetonius with any writer of our 

 own time, in point of credit due to his narration, I would 

 fcarcely aflign him a place fuperior to Smollet's ; I mean not 

 with refped to compofition, but as to authenticity and materials. 

 Both of them feem to have compiled from the a£lus d'lurni. or 

 newfpapers of the day, and to merit equal authority with thofe 

 crude and hafty chronicles. If the one has lived for eighteen 

 centuries, while the other poflibly may not for one, it has per- 

 haps been owing to the charms of his compofition, not to the 

 dignity of his hiftory. 



If thefe remarks fhall in any degree tend to afcertain the 

 rank of this famed hiftorian in the fcale of hiftory, or rather by 

 calling the attention of more accurate obfervers to the general 

 completion of his works, to induce them to afcertain it, they 

 will have an importance which at this remote time they could 

 not borrow from the fubjed itfelf. They may perhaps alfo 

 derive fome additional claim to attention, from the circumftance 

 of a celebrated attack having been lately made by Mr. Whitakcr 

 of Manchefter, on the authenticity of his rival hiftorian, in a 

 Comparifon between Tacitus and Gibbon. 



