1799.] Comparative State of Literature in the pajft and prefent Temes. X1% 
tion, as haughty as kings were under the 
old tendal fyftem, if any of the princes 
jn being would contend with the fame 
eagernefs for their favour, as we learn the 
various fovereigns of Europe did, for 
that of Petrarch, or Erafmus. | 
It has been queftioned by fome, whe- 
ther the number of publications, which 
are annually poured upon the world, have: 
conainged! in any proportionable ratio 
to the enereafe of literature? In my 
opinion, they have zot. To a liberal 
and cultivated mind there is certainly no 
indulgence equal to the luxury of books : 
but, in works of learning, may not the 
facilities of information be encrealed, 
until! the powers of application and re- 
tention be diminifhed? Atter admitting 
that the prefent is a learned age, it may 
appear fingular to. doubt, whether it 
affords individuals as profoundly learned, 
{at leaft, as far as Latin and Greek go,) 
as fome who flourifhed in the fitteenth and 
fixteenth centuries. “The general mafs of 
Jearning is greater now than it was then ; 
and is evidently of a more valuable ten- 
dency. Yet; whether any of the {cho- 
Jars of the prefent day could compofe 
Latin verfes with as much claffic purity, 
and tafte, as Strada, Sannazarius, or 
Politiano; or whether any of our com- 
mentators, eminent as they are, could 
break a {pear in the amphitheatre of cri- 
ticifm, with Erafmus, Scaliger, Salma. 
fius, or Milton, is a matter I much 
doubt. I am aware that the different 
{tate in which literature now ftands, com- 
pared with that in which it formerly ftood, 
may be urged as one reafon for the fu- 
perior celebrity which learning then con- 
terred. Men generally unenlightened, 
but knowing the value of information, 
would make comparifons, and attribute 
to genius a degree of credit, perhaps, ex- 
ceeding its real merit: but, independent 
of this, the writings of the early critics 
contain infinite learning. Before the 
modern languages were fo polifhed that 
{cholars could compole in them, it is 
known that the praétice prevailed gene- 
rally amongift literary men, of writing 
and {peaking in Latin. This naturally 
led to a knowledge of that language, not 
only from motives of refinement, but of 
neceflity alfo: for hiftories, poems, and 
even familiar letters, were compoled in 
Latin. The ftudy of fchool-divinity, 
and the difcuffion of learned queftions m 
the form of thefes, ferved to quicken the 
comprehenfion of the ftudent: and the 
introduction of the Ariftotelian philofophy 
into the {chools, however little it might 
agree with the fimplicity of the Gofpel, 
would naturally give the mind a degree 
of penetration and conjecture conducive 
to the dilcoveries of emendatory criticifm. 
An acquaintance with the Latin was not, 
however, confined to om fex only: the 
knowledge of it was familiar to ladies of 
rank in the fixteenth century. We are 
told by Moreri of the unfortunate Queen 
of Scots, “¢ That fhe was doubtleis the 
hand{omeft prineefs of her age, and very 
learned in the Latin tongue, in which fhe 
prono need feveral orations.’* And there 
are ftill preferved in the Bodleian, if I 
miftake not, fome Latin letters, or piecesy 
of Queen Elizabeth, in her own hand- 
writing. Catharine of Medicis alfo is 
reprefented by hiftorians as a fplendid 
patronefs of literature. She poffefled the 
hereditary attachment of her houfe to 
letters and learned men; and was, we 
may reafonably conclude, fkilful in the 
languages. . 
The ftrange mixture of religion and 
gallaptry, chivalry and imagination, that 
exifted in the dark ages, had zot loft its 
bold upon the minds of men, even after 
the reftoration of light under the pon- 
tificate of Leo. ‘This fyftem was a faf- 
cinating appeal to the paflions, and gave 
rife-—firit to romances, which are an un- 
connected and improbable narration: of 
religion, love, and war; and next—te 
novels, a more contracted and probable 
fpecies of ftory. Of the laft defcription, 
the Italians, and particularly Bocaccio, 
have afforded many fpecimens highly en- 
tertaining. Cervantes himfelf, although 
he wrote in ridicule of the prevailing tatte 
of the age, does not appear to have been 
entirely free from the contagion of chi- 
valry. His * Don Qutxote’ thews a 
writer well read in romance, and nat 2 
little attached to it. The novels he has 
introduced in the body of his work, dif- 
play the predominant {pirit of the times. 
They are beautiful, and exquifitely touch- 
ing. Sohighly, indeed, did the Spanifh 
and Italian novelifts poffefs the power of 
imagination, a power in fuch times not 
much lefs than the power of the keys in 
the fucceflors of St. Peter, that Shake- 
{peare, that great mafter of poetic fiction, 
has founded many of his dramatic pieces 
upon ftories taken from the latter *.— 
*-Or call up him that left half told, 
The ftory of Cambufcan bold, 
Of Camball, and of Algarfife, 
And whe had Canace to wife. 
That own’d the virtuous ring and glafs, 
And of the wond’rous horfe of brafs, 
On which the Tartar king did ride.” 
' (i Penferofe } 
ay 
