The Press. — London, England, 1858-02-20 00:00:00

, i THE PRESS, FEBRUARY 20,1858. (published in Bohn's Library)— which Mr. Bawlinson, by the way, seems contemptuously to ignore—though able and scholarlike, is too literal for general readers. In the version before us a few coarse expressions are softened or omitted, but the flavour of the style is pre served in terse and readable language, and those unacquainted with Greek may be satisfied that they will here lose as little of the original as is possible. The volume contains, first, an introduction, in which are discussed the life of Herodotus so far as it can be ascer tained, the sources from which he drew his history, and his merits and defects us an histo rian. This is followed by the translation, illustrated by copious historical and topogra phical footnotes, to which succeed eleven 'essays, on the histories of Lydia, Media, Persia, Assyria, and Babylonia, including their religions and their affinities of race. There .are also maps and occasional woodcuts ; and .every topic, apparently, which the narrative suggests has received due consideration either from the editor himself or from one of the two 'distinguished Orientalists who have assisted him. Among the interesting matters em- IN aced by the book, the only two on which we have space to say anything are-1. Mr. Raw iinson's view of the general credibility of Herodotus ; 2. The light thrown on ancient Asiatic history by the late discoveries. The trustworthiness of the historian has ibeen rudely assailed by the two latest writers who have discussed his work. Colonel Mure, svhile giving him credit for veracious inten tions, and ranking him higher than a mere prose rhapsodist, lays so much stress upon the instances of his credulity, self contradic tion, and other similar faults, as to leave very little except his style, manner, and epic ar rangement for which he deserves praise. Mr. Blakesley goes still further, and, adopting the criticisms of Dionysius and Strabo, and the supposed allusions of Thucydides, which assign to Herodotus merely a superior rank among the logographers or legendary histo rians, concludes that he himself never claimed to be anything more, and that his work is chiefly valuable, not as a record of what hap pened, but of what the Greeks believed to have happened, during the period of which it treats. He thinks that the nearest parallel to him is afforded by the travels of Marco Polo. Mr. Rawlinson claims for his author a much higher position than either of the above writers With regard to the Life of Herodotus, he agrees for the most part with modern scho lars, though, while giving a much wider range to his travels than Mr. 'Blakesley or Colonel Mure are inclined to allow, he is equally indisposed to admit the latitude claimed for them by Dahlmann, who seems to believe that the historian visited almost every place which he mentions. In com mon with all who have examined the subject, he disbelieves the preposterous story of the recitation at Olympia, but supposes it pro bable that portions of the work may have been read privately at Athens, where its author probably made the acquaintance of most of the eminent men of the period. He believes ]ling then to have accompanied a colony to fhurium, where be spent the remainder of his life ( with the exception of one more visit to Athens) in retouching and elaborating his history. Herodotus has been frequently supposed to have drawn a great part of his materials from other historians. After passing these in re view, Mr. Rawlinson concludes that he was indebted to none but Ilecaticus and the trea tises of the mythologers ; deriving, perhaps, some of the ethical stories from a poetical source. To the geographers be owes perhaps greater obligations. But the chief origin of all that he has written " was personal observa tion and inquiry "—traces of which are to be found in all parts of his work. For more remote times he would of course be dependent on general tradition—checked or supported by the'Juonumental records, whether consisting of lists of kings, archons, victors at the games, tte., or of inscriptions on temple-offerings, the latter of which were doubtless curious and abundant. In the Asiatic and Egyptian cities the same records were open to him which have lately been explored; but as he could not read them for himself, like his modern editors, ho was obliged to depend on priests and local ciceroni, who, while giving him a tolerably faithful outline, led him into numerous ►►►is takes of detail, and systematically concealed or distorted eve►ything at all discreditable to their country. Thus in the Persian annals the early history of Cyrus is pure fable, while the latter part is confirmed by recent dis coveries. Mr. Blakesley, who seems to think Ctesias quite as good an authority as Herodo tus, will probably modify his belief on perusing the note at page 69, where " the Behistun " inscription furnishes a running comment on " the Third Book of Herodotus," which is proved to be correct in its main incidents, while the account of Ctesias is almost entirely false. The main narrative of the former Mr. Rawlinson judges on the whole to be worthy of historical credit:— In the portion of his history which has reference to foreign countries and to more ancient times, the most valuable truths and the merest fables lie often side by side. Ile is at the mercy of his informants, and is compelled to repeat their statements, ever, where he does not believe them. In Greece itself, and in other countries as he comes nearer to his own time, his information is better and more abundant ; he is able to Rift and compare state ments, to balance the weight of evidence, and to arrive at conclusions which are probably in the main correct. The events related in his last five book. were but little removed from his own day, and with regard to these he has almost the authority of a contemporary historian; for his infor mants must have been chiefly persona engaged iu the transactions. • • The episodes themselves must be judged separately, each on its own merits. The traditions of the Scyths, of the Medea before Cvazares, of Lydia before Gyges, and of all countries without a literature, must be received with the greatest caution, end regarded as having the least pos sible weight. But the accounts of Iggypt, Assyria, Baby. lon, Persia, and the various states of Greece, having been derived in part from monuments and otherwise from those who possessed access to monuments, deserve throughout attentive consideration. They may from various causes often be incorrect in particulars, but they may be expected to be true in outline, and in their details they may not un frequently embody the contents of authentic documents existing at the time when Herodotus wrote, but now irre coverably lost to us. Critical judgment must separate in them the probable from the improbable ; but whatever comes under the former head, and is not contradicted by better authority, may well be received as historical, at least until fresh discoveries shall at once thsprove their truth, and supply us with more authentic details tc substitute in their place. Mr. Rawlinson considers the merits of Herodotus as an historian to be, that he was diligent, honest, impartial, and free from any political bias or national vanity. His honesty has been impeached by Ctesias and the pseudo Plutarch, who however, on a comparison with Scripture, with Berosus, and with the monu ments, are themselves proved respectively to deserve the name of " lying chronicler" which they applied to him. His defects are, his credulity, which induces him to load his nar rative with dreams, omens, and prodigies ; his belief in a divine " Envy " which would suffer no one to be prosperous but itself, a theory which be is constantly trying to sup port by very farfetched examples ; and a spirit of exaggeration, a want of accuracy, and a want of historical insight, which make his history almost valueless as a record of the causes of events. As a writer, he deserves praise for his epic unity, for the clever sub ordination of his episodes to the main thread of his narrative, for his skill in the delineation of character, for the pictorial vividness of his descriptions, for the pathos and humour never degenerating into either bombast or vulgarity which distinguish his stories, and for the sim- plicity and dramatic force with which they are presented to the reader. The result at which Mr. Rawlinson has arrived concerning the history of the Mesopo tamian countries is, that the first paramount power in Western Asia was (as Berosus had implied) that of Lower Chaldtea, lasting front II c. 2234 to 1273 ; that this was succeeded by the Assyrian supremacy, during which Nineveh rose to metropolitan eminence (B.C. 1 . 373-747, the " era of Nabonassar "); and that the later Babylonian empire, during which Babylon attained her highest pitch of splendour, in cluded one dynasty extending feom the latter date to the destruction of Nineveh in 625, and another from 625 to the capture of Babylon by Cyrus in 538. For the method by which these results are reached we must refer our readers to the essays themselves. Their chro nology, on the whole, tends to the confirmation .187 of the scanty hints thrown out by Herodotua and of the fuller account given by Berosus. The &MittlllllAlllB of legend, the last King of Assyria, is really Asshur-emit-ili, the son of the real Sardanupalus, or Asshur-bani-pal, son Of the Esar-haddon of Scripture, and the most civilised, tl.ough not tl:e most powerful, of the Assyrian monarchs. The most remark able of these were Sargon, who took Satnaria, and who was the builder of sonic of the largest palaces lately discovered ; SenAacherib, who was equally magnificent at home, and greater as a conqueror abroad ; and " Esar-haddon his son," whose architectural remains are the most splendid and extensive of all. In Babylon, it is curious that the ruler who most prominently figures in Scripture is the one on whom most lightis thrown by the recent discoveries. He seems to have been a less beneficent Anrungzebe. His accession is fixed at B.C. 601 (the date usually assigned). and his death after . a reign of forty three years at B.C. 561. The account of his military enter prises—so far us they touch on the Bible and on Herodotus—given in Essay VIII., is very interesting, but too long for extract. He was no less great as a builder; the walls, which are computed to have inclosed a space five times as large as London, and are said to have been three hundred feet high, were the work of his captives; and the vast mounds which still tower over the stagnant river and the desolate plain exhibit on every calcined brick which composes them the name of Nebuchad nezzar. We have in the above remarks stated results alone, and have not been able to enter into any of the points in which Mr. Rawlinson combats previous writers. Much controversy will doubtless be excited by his chronological schemes, and it would be obviously premature to place absolute faith in the present stage of the question upon any deductions whatever. Yet in the cuneiform inscriptions it is impos sible not to admit that a basis of investigation has been obtained which will not fluctuato with the views entertained from time to time of the credibility of Herodotus, Ctesias, or any other writer. This is a great gain. And it is no less a subject of congratulation that we possess writers like Mr. Rawlinson, his brother, and Sir G. Wilkinson, who are really competent to do justice to these valuable ma terials, and who, with that talent for combine.- don in which an English writer generally excels his German brethren, are raising in the work before us a monument of learning. industry, and sagacious research worthy alike of their own reputation and of being placed beside the greatest historical productions which have illustrated the nineteenth century. NEW NOVELS. 1. Gaston Bligh. 113 L. S. Lavenu. Two Vols. London: Smith and Elder. 2. Uncle Ralph. By the Author of " Dorothy," &c. Lotplon : John W. Parker and Son. 3. Dawn and Twilight. By the Author of " Amy Grant," &c. Two vols. London :J. H. Parker. 1. •Gaston 13ligh " would deserve to be considered the best novel that has appeared for many months if the writer's notion of life and its obligations were at all equcl to his (?) manner of telling a story. We had lately occasion to remark (PREss, Dec. 20, 1857) that the novels inculcating the most questionable views of duty were at the present day generally written by women. If the one hetore us, as would seem by many of its characteristics to be the case, is the work of a masculine hand, we can only lament that the intellectual or moral disease complained of has communicated itself to a writer whose apps. rently wide eAperience and great general ability might have been expected to preserve him from suoh contagion. Gaston Bligh is the only son of a widow who, in overstrained obe.lienee to her deceased hus band's wishes, brings him up by strict rule and method, with every possible care, but without the least show of affection. This plan of education en. tirely fails wi;.h the boy, who is wild and reckless, and has no love for any one but his aunt, Mrs. Godwin, who alone understands his character. One day, in a paroxysm of juvenile rage, he sets fire to his mother's house, which is burnt down ; soil, though he repents and behaves well afterwards, is never again trusted by either mother or aunt. After distinguishing himself at Oxford, where his o.treer is quite unexceptionable, he falls in with his cousin,