genuine from the adulterated, the truthful from the untruthful, before accepting them? The

deliberate endorsement of a false statement by another person, is as criminal, as the statement itself, made by the first author. Ignorance cannot excuse those who can apply the rules of criticism.

9. But, if it is incumbent on a reader of history to use criticism before admitting facts, how much more must it be obligatory on a writer? He that writes a history, lays the foundation of belief for posterity, and furnishes a guide which will direct them in their social and moral relations. Now, if it is deemed a crime to deceive an individual, by a wilful falsehood; how much more to lead into error whole nations, by a culpable misrepresentation of facts? It is, therefore, the absolute duty of a writer, to submit to a rigid criticism all the facts, which are to form the subject of his history.

10. For the direction, then, of the writer and reader of history, we shall point out the criterions of critique; remarking first, that some

(9.) Prove the same proposition with regard to the writer of history.

(10.) Have you any criterions for the direction of a writer and reader of history?

What histories are original?

histories are original; namely: they contain the primitive narrative of a series of facts, given by the first author.

11. Second; some are copies, from the original made by other authors, with some additions or alterations.

12. Third; others are versions, made from one language into another.

13. Fourth; original histories are mostly coeval; that is, written about the same epoch as the facts related. Copies are generally non-coeval; that is, they are written long after the events have occurred. Versions are often both coeval and non-coeval; that is, they are made in the same epoch, as the original history, or in succeeding times.

14. It follows, therefore, that the criterions which must guide the writer and reader of history, have reference to three classes; viz: original history, copies and versions. Hence, we shall divide this subject into three sections.

(11.) What are copies?

(12.) What are versions?

(13.) What histories are coeval with the writer?

Are copies and versions coeval also?

SECTION I.

CRITERIONS OF CRITICISM CONCERNING AN
ORIGINAL HISTORY.

PART I.

CRITERIONS FOR THE WRITER OF HISTORY.

NOTE. We deem it incumbent on our part to treat of every subject of Belles-Lettres concisely, yet completely. But it happens not unfrequently, that some topics naturally lead us to the exposition of the philosophical principles on which their rules are based. To omit those would be to mutilate the subject badly; and leave the mind of the student in sad ignorance of the principles on which the rules rest. These would seem then gratuitous, and their nature would be neither well understood, nor remembered by the scholar. On the other hand, it may appear, that the youthful mind, for whom this treatise on Belles-Lettres is designed, is not capable yet of comprehending philosophical principles. To this objection we reply; that it is our opinion that some scientific principles are not so abstruse as many imagine. Their obscurity is often owing to the confused ideas and obscure language of a preceptor. This fault we shall endeavor to avoid. For the rest, as it is our duty to treat of a subject in full; so it belongs to the teacher to use his own discretion in the selection of the subjects to be studied by his pupils, according to their capacity. If he deem it well

to postpone for a time, either wholly, or in part, a subject, or species of composition which requires more maturity of thought; he may do so, without any impropriety or injury to the student. But in all cases, it would not be amiss to make an experiment first.

1. Preliminary Remarks.-I. It is here presupposed, that the facts, which are designed to form the subject of history, have some reference to men, either in their cause, effect, or adjuncts, as required by the definition of history in its proper sense.

2. II. Historical facts must belong either to the physical order of nature, or moral order of human actions; because facts or truths of the logical or metaphysical order, even if they regard man, are not classified as subjects of history, in its strict sense.

3. III. The facts to be related may be either coeval, or uncoeval with the writer, as explained above; hence,

4.

FIRST GENERAL CRITERION. "When facts are coeval with the writer, two points must be ascer

(1.) What is here pre-supposed, in relation to facts which are to form the subject of history?

(2.) To what order must historical facts belong?

(3.) Is it necessary that the facts should be coeval with the

writer ?

(4.) Give the first general criterion, for the writer of history.

tained by the historian; first, the possibility; second, the existence of the fact. This general criterion is subdivided into other particular criterions, as follows:

5. FIRST PARTICULAR CRITERION, CONCERNING THE POSSIBILITY OF A FACT. "No fact is to be admitted which is impossible." This criterion is subject to the following principles and rules.

6. There are three classes of impossibility, to-wit; Metaphysical, Physical, and Moral.

7. PRINCIPLE I. A “ metaphysical impossibility, which implies a contradiction in terms, or, in other words, which contains an intrinsic absurdity and falsehood, cannot be made a reality by any power, either natural or supernatural." Such is the impossibility, that "two added to two are equal to three." If such a proposition were true, four objects would at the same time be four and three, which is utterly impossible. Hence,

8.

FIRST RULE. By analyzing the ideas

Does the general criterion admit of a subdivision?

(5.) What is the first particular criterion concerning the possibility of a fact?

(6.) How many kinds of impossibility are there?

(7.) What is the first principle concerning metaphysical impos

sibility?

Illustrate it by example.