i the author acknowledges, that in the 
execution of his extensive plan, he is 
« conscious there are great defects. But 
as this plan is chronological, it may be 
justly deemed an outline to be improved 
hereafter, as opportunity may offer, and 
to be continued through future times.” 
This chronological plan of Mr. Pol- 
whele’s is certainly very different from 
that of any other county historian, but 
we fear this difference will not obtain it 
much pre-eminence : for though we ap- 
prove of some parts, yet we must de- 
cidedly reprove others, and particularly 
its execution. ‘The labour of searching 
_ after the various memoranda relating to 
one place is endless, and the /ong quota- 
tions, and frequency of repetition, be- 
come extremely tiresome. ‘Thus, in 
narrating the history and description of 
@ certain ancient town, castle, &c. we 
. find some particulars, or rather disser- 
tations, on it, under the British period; 
again, ina subsequent part of the vo- 
lume, under the head of civil and mi- 
_ litary transactions of the Romans; some 
of this is again repeated with uncon- 
nected scraps, under the respective dy- 
"nasties of the Saxons, Danes, Normans, 
&c. And if the author completes a 
parochial history of the county, most 
of them must be again related, or his 
readers will have the painful task of re- 
erring to several distant parts of the book 
to obtain the particular history of a 
single place. The pian thus. marked, 
out by our ingenious author is subject 
: many objections; and for a county 
| history of local information and refer- 
ence, cannot obtain the suffrage of to- 
_ pographers and antiquaries. But these 
are not our only objections to Mr. Pol- 
_ whele’s history: his manner of surcharg- 
' ing it with long, inapposite extracts from 
other printed books; his predilection 
for theory and dissertation; his ready 
: acquiescence in and vindication of the 
reveries of Borlase; his very bad prints, 
&c. are all defects in his work, and such 
as become doubly reprehensible in aman 
of genius and talent. 
The first book of his work is occupied 
with dissertations on the civil and mi- 
’ -litary transactions whith relate to Corn- 
Wall, from the time of Julius Cesar to 
_ Vortigern. Of this period we have 
cely any records, and therefore Mr. 
hele acknowledges he must be con- 
tented to connect ‘afew scattered:facts 
“by the links of: probability.” This is 
admissible: occasionally, but it should 
4 
é 
FOLWHELE’S HISTORY OF CORNWALL. 
3G 
be adopted with great caution. In a 
subsequent part of the work, the author 
observes, that “ tradzion will oftenthrow 
great light on the obscurity of history. 
Tradition, with no presumptive proofs 
from history to precede it, is little to be 
regarded. If we allow it to lead the 
way, it is ever a fallacious guide: but 
when wecan introduce it as an auxiliary, 
its claims are certainly to be heard.” 
An instance of Mr. Polwhele’s ready 
admission of tradition eccurs in the fol- 
lowing narrative: “ There is a strong 
tradition in the parish of Bishop’s Ly. 
diard, that lies under the Quantock. 
hills, relating to a Romam battle, Ona 
farm in this parish (say the country 
people) was fought the last battle be- 
tween ‘the Western Britons and their 
enemies of Rome. The former were 
totally defeated, and the farm has ever 
since been called Conquest Farm. The 
tenant is ready to point out to enquirers 
the very situation of the armies: and near 
the fatal spot is a circular camp, of 
about twenty acres. ‘This surely is es 
markable; and here I can readily sce the 
spot where Vespasian routed the Bri» 
tons before he proceeded on his march. 
towards Exeter.’’ 
The second chapter applies to the 
geography of Danmonium, and the ori-. 
ginal government of its inhabitants, with 
some account of their civil and military’ 
constitution. 
“ With respeet to the geography of 
Danmonium,”’ observes Mr. Polwhele; 
“ ] shall quote the descriptions of Pto~ 
lomy and Richard, as far as they 
relate to the western part of the ishinds 
Ptolemy of Alexandria, who fsu- 
rished punder the emperors Trajan; 
Hadrian, and Antoninus Pius, is one of 
the most ancient geographers, whose 
works are extant. It may be proper to 
premise, that there are two general er- 
rors in Ptolemy, which afféct the whole 
geopraphy of Britain: this writer Has 
made all England decline from the true 
position as to the length of it, and en- 
tirely changed the position of Stotland, 
representing its length from east to.west, 
instead of trom. south to north; and he 
has placed the whole of South Britain 
too far north by two or three degrees.” 
The inaccuracy’ of all ancient’ maps 
of Britain is not at all’ surprising, when 
we recollect the relative ttaté of society 
and science; but we are surprised that 
modern writers place so much depen- 
dence'on their authority, and the position 
