1806.] 



Altering not always amending. 



13: 



torn. IV. Americte Tkeodori dc Brr/. - — It 

 would tlieretbre not be I'lirpriiing if in 

 tliis infiance a German were to follow 

 J>tin'eu and Doppcimayer, and, with tlie 

 author of the trogrcH cles Ailcmands, to 

 call out that his countrymen not only in- 

 vented piiuting and u:unpowdci-, but dif- 

 covered the New World. Hear, how- 

 ever, wiiat tliis hiiloriun fays : — ' Whc- 

 .tlicr IVIartin Beheiin difcovered the New 

 World, as llicciolus* will have it, or even 

 knew the I'traits oi Magellan, as Beirzo- 

 nus affirms, appears to mc very uncer- 

 tain. If Hartnuum Schedel affirms in his 

 Latin Chronicle that he and Jacob Ca- 

 nus (ttho difcovered Congo,) went fo far 

 beyond the equator, that their (ha- 

 dows, when they looked to the call, 

 fell on their nght liands, this does 

 not prove that they reached America : 

 it liuppens to whoever croli'es the hue. 

 Tile old documents which \^ lilfcr, Wa- 

 genfeil, Stiiven, and Doppelmaycr, have 

 excerpted, are lilcnt ; and the ditlicuky 

 is incrcafed by the date al'ligned to Mar- 

 tin Beheim's Cluut of the World, which 

 is 1492, wlien Columbus was already on 

 his voysige. Do[)pehnayer had a fuc- 

 jlmile of this chart re^engraved. The 

 more 1 examine it, the kls 1 think it en- 

 croaches on the merit of Colunibus or of 

 MaiicUan.' In another place he adds, 

 '■ Columbus therefore difcovered the New 

 A\'orld, but Vefputius the proper Ameri- 

 ca, or at Icall firlt made it known in the 

 Old World. \^e German';, though dif- 

 coverers of many things, have here no 

 part, but rcfign the glory to the Geno- 

 efe and the Horentines, unlefs we can 

 fancy it an honour that the new or fourth 

 quarter of tlie world wears a German 

 name ; for Amerigo, or Americus, is the 

 good olfi German Emrlclt Itahani/ed.' 



" After this uncrpiivocal proof of a 

 praifeworthy impartiality, allow me to 

 ^ive you a fpccimen of our author's cha- 

 racter of refcarch, which involves a care- 

 ful miimtcnefs. It Ihull refpcit the hif- 



* " Mr.Celiauer ihould not have ftated that 

 Ricciolus will have it fo. He It-aves it (ioubt- 

 ful. The paflage runs thus — ' Cliriftopliorus 

 Columbus rum prius in "iladeira infula, ubi 

 c&nfuiendis ac delineindis chartis geographi- 

 cii vacabat, five fu()))to inteiiio, ut erat vir 

 allronomia cofmograpliiie tt phyfues gnarus, 

 five indicio h.ibito a Maitn.o Bohcmo, aut, 

 ut Ilifpani diftitant, ab Alplionfo Sanchez de 

 Helva nauclcro, qui forte incideiit in infulann 

 poftci Dominic. im diiSam, cogitudct de navi- 

 gationc in lndi.im OccidciUalein.' — Geogra- 

 l>i ia et llydr"^. Rcformatiiif lib. 111. c, zz. 



tuiy of a bon mot. Mr. Gebauer find* 

 it related of John \^ of Portugsd, that 

 lie told his nobility, * John \V. loved 

 vou ; Don Pedro feared you ; I have 

 neither prejudice' — Vos d'dexit avus ; ?«e- 

 tuit paicr ; at ego neitl.rui/i. In the note 

 he indicates a paffage in the Memoirs ol 

 Madame de Maintenon, (vol. 3, c. 4,) in 

 which, at the time of the revocation of 

 the Edict of Nantes, Louis XIV^ is re- 

 lated 10 have faid to M. de Ruvigni, a 

 I'roteliant nobleman, ' AIoii grand peie 

 vous oiinail ; mon pere vans craignait ; 

 pour rnoi, je ne tons crains, nl ne votes 

 aiine.' There is fo much of refcmblance 

 in the turn of the two fpceches, that they 

 can hardly be both original. Probably 

 the Portugucze King had the French 

 King in view ; and his fentimcnt is but 

 a prolongation of one which (>ccurs in the 

 Apoplitlicgmes de Henri le Grand, who 

 faid to the deputies of the Uuguenots, 

 Le. lioi Ilcnyi (III.) vous craignait, et 

 ne vvua uiiaait pus ; muis inoi je voua aime 

 et ne vous cruins pun.' — [To be continued.^ 



To the Editor of the Mmthly Mugaziiie, 



SIR, 

 " Altering not always amending." 



UNDER this title permit me to fay 

 two words to your correfpondent 

 " M. N." concerning his critique on a 

 paflaiic of Milton, p. 392, iu your pre- 

 fent volume. I do not intend to enter 

 into the merits or demerits of the paffage 

 in qucftion, but I beg you will infert my 

 prutc'ft a-ijainll the emendation. Whether 

 " M. N.'' be a poet, or whatever may be 

 the mufic of his ear, I wouUl alk, can he 

 think the monofyliable liius — " Him who 

 durji THUS defy' — tolerable in the place 

 to which he has aflignedit? Or, indeed, 

 can he, as a poet, endure the tautology 

 upon which he has ftumbled in the fuUovv- 

 ing line : " Omnipotent, Almighty Fower" 

 not to mention tlie duphcation of the 

 difio vocfi/is, which I conceive the inimi.^ 

 tabic author originally dehgncd to avoid, 

 in the order obfcrvod by liimfelf. Mil- 

 ton, Sir, was not a '\faultlefs monfter ;" 

 but I do not think " M. N." (atleaftif 

 we may judge from this fpecjmen) is to 

 be .'idimtted as the corrector of Milton; 

 and whatever be the faults of this parti- 

 culor palVage, I tiull your readers will ad- 

 mit with me that the critic has fallen iuto 

 greater. Yoin's, &c. 



Ay AnMTiiER OF TUii original Mi'ton. 

 June 20, l!30(j. 



1 I» 



