strait Euripus into Negripo, and hence our name Negropont for the island of Euboea; they christened the island of Samothrace, St. Mandroche. A more natural blunder, the result of which is an odd one, was the calling Belopoulus, La belle poule. When such was the nomenclature of professed geographers, it is hardly wonderful if even such men as Erasmus and some of his contemporaries and successors, should be found sometimes, as they are, tripping in their ideas of geography.

At present, the study of the modern languages of the classical regions, and still more the careful survey of their geography, is doing much to improve matters in these respects. When the older commentators told their readers what Pausanias or Strabo said of any river, town, or mountain, they do not seem to have thought it possible that there could be any later authorities, but took it for granted, that, having adduced these, they had settled all disputed questions at once. In later times, since the attention of capable modern travellers has been turned to the subject, such superficial observation is entirely insufficient; and, at the same time, the labor of the critic is materially enhanced, notwithstanding his mass of new material. There are, for instance, perhaps a dozen different theories on the subject of the immediate situation of the city of Troy, and the geography of the plain of Ilium. The scholar who undertakes to ascertain the most probable of these, will subject himself to the labor of deep and careful investigation, much of which, as we have seen by Mr. Leverett's observations, comes into the province of the lexicographer.

The reader will see, from these remarks, how extensive the erudition and how persevering the labor necessary to any persons who attempt to make a complete Latin Lexicon. So far as regards the vocabulary, they can derive comparatively little assistance from previous English writers; they must have a complete knowledge of the language, manners, arts, and philosophy of the Romans, and they must be capable, at the same time, of laying such information before the world in a tangible form- not losing, like some critics we could name, half the advantage of their knowledge of the Latin tongue, from their ignorance of their own.

Nor, is the execution of such a work, in such a complete manner, a matter of doubtful utility, or useful merely to a small class of learned men. Considering them merely as

school-books, they are of the greatest value. We have heard it hinted, on respectable authority, that books prepared for school-books, do not require deep erudition, but that their principal merits are simplicity of arrangement and expression. Merits, these are, undoubtedly, and ought not to be neglected, but, at least in the preparation of classical books, constant precision, learning, and care, is no where more needed than in those which are to be put into the hands of the young. Give a school-boy a book where he knows he can find what he needs, if he will search for it faithfully, and you give him a new motive for action. He feels an independence in his ability to accomplish his task without constantly calling for the aid or interference of another, he feels a pride that his mental faculties are strong enough to be exercised in the same way that men exercise theirs, that he is able to look to the reason of every thing, and understand every detail fully. If he be properly educated, these motives will have a strong influence upon him. No child, who hast been properly trained, is not proud to find himself able to go alone, without constantly requiring the guidance of a superior. More than this; by putting into his hands such tools for labor, you take from him all excuse for not doing his work well. A boy soon learns how far a text-book may be relied upon for accuracy in its directions, and the moment any serious flaw is detected in it, that moment he feels himself privileged to neglect its instructions entirely. He will always have an excuse for rejecting them, substituting the supposed superior intelligence of his own imagination. School-books, then, must be thorough and strictly accurate; and the remark applies with peculiar force to such as those before us, which are intended for constant reference.

Nor is the value of such thoroughly executed works less to another great body of readers of the classical languages; those who read for their amusement or the direct acquisition of information. These have no time to go into philological or critical research as to the bearing and weight of the words they fall in with; they must have, in a condition fit for use, all such information provided for them, that they need have no labor imposed upon them, beyond that of understanding the immediate meaning of the author with whom they are engaged.

We have, however, perhaps, said too much on these points. The very great value of an accurate and thorough Latin Lexi

con, might have been taken for granted, and the tremendous difficulty of making it presupposed. We should then have only to begin by saying, that Mr. Leverett's Lexicon will be found such; in its preparation every obstacle seems to have been surmounted, and every precaution used. For comprehensiveness of plan, for accuracy of detail, for general skill and philosophical arrangement of its contents, for the precision and correctness of its statements, for the care of its execution, and the beauty and exactness of its outward appearance, it is, so far as we know, without a rival. Whoever makes it his counsellor soon begins to rely upon it as an almost unerring authority. In a single volume, the student finds that for which he has been accustomed to seek in many different quarters; besides a vocabulary, he finds, in its careful notations of quantity, the advantages of a gradus; in its full quotations from authorities, he finds little need for the cumbrous volumes of a thesaurus; and its explanations of ancient geography and art, leave him little to look for in treatises of a more restricted character. We know that this is high praise; we have not uttered it, however, without well weighing our words, and without a full knowledge, derived from daily experience, of the book of which we write. We propose to proceed to show, by a slight examination of the manner in which the book was edited, the cause of the success of its execution, and, we believe, we may give the reader, at the same time, some idea of the immense labor requisite in such a composition. Of the very accurate and skilful abridgment of Leverett's work, the title of which stands at the head of this article, we shall have occasion to speak before we have done.

The increased attention paid to the practical, by modern men of science, has had its effect in critical as well as in other researches. The scholars of the middle ages were more apt to seek the best occasions for measuring their wits with their contemporaries, than for adding to the real stock of available knowledge. More recently, however, men have worked with a more utilitarian spirit, and with much greater real effect. More than this; the pride which once prevented an author from consulting a predecessor, or at best, made him look on his labors with a prejudiced eye, has long since subsided. Men are too well satisfied that it is impossible for one person to acquire perfect knowledge of any one subject by his unassisted exertions, to make any pretensions to such

acquisitions. So that where the monkish scholar of the middle ages, would, partly by choice and partly from necessity, produce, with immense labor, an imperfect, though an original work, more recent critics are enabled to avail themselves of the exertions of others with better grace, and greater ease. Mr. Leverett's Lexicon, as we learn from the title-page and preface, is "compiled chiefly from the Magnum Totius Latinitatis of Facciolati and Forcellini, and the German works of Scheller and Lünemann." A slight investigation of the history of those works and their claim to our attention, will not be out of place here.

The Lexicon formerly in best repute in the Italian schools appears to have been that known as the Calepine Lexicon, which had undergone revisions from various hands, till, in the year 1715, the duty of preparing a new edition of it was undertaken by Facciolati, a professor in the University of Padua. On this labor he employed himself for four years, during which time he tells us, he became more and more satisfied that there were so many changes necessary in that work that nothing of value could be effected, excepting in the form of an entirely new book. In the year 1718, accordingly, he undertook his "Corpus Totius Latinitatis," at the suggestion, or with the permission, of the heads of the University, who directed him to select some of the students to assist him in the execution of it. Thus encouraged, he selected Ægidius Forcellini, who had previously assisted him, and who subsequently bore much of the labor of the undertaking. The account given by him of his performance of this duty is singular, and reflects much credit on him, and much authority to the book itself. For instance: "About the end of 1718," he says, "by the directions of Cardinal Cornelius, Bishop of Padua, and of Professor James Facciolati, I eagerly began this great undertaking, and occupied myself for three years and a half on the letter A." When such was the slowness of the progress of the work at its very beginning, the reader will hardly wonder that its completion did not take place till 1755, forty years after the first work was begun, during the whole of which time, with the exception of seven years, Forcellini was occupied upon it, almost always as his only employment. At the close of his preface he writes, "by God's permission, I have brought this book to an end, and now, if my life is granted to me, I shall re-read it, and then deliver it to another to copy." A postscript to this informs us that

he completed his second reading in about two years. The copying was finished in eight years more; he died before it was finished.

The Lexicon was in fact the labor of his life. He constantly enjoyed the advice, and acted, probably, in great measure, under the directions, of Facciolati; but he appears to have devoted himself to it with untiring zeal and perseverance. It is a worthy monument to his labors. Its name expresses its nature, better than many such titles do. It is, emphatically, a systematic digest of the Latin language, a book in which the student who is searching for ancient authorities can hardly fail to find at hand such as he needs. Its quotations from the ancient authors are very numerous, and at the same time full; there is given in most instances the whole of a passage, any part of which is needed as an illustration. We believe we speak within bounds when we say that it exhibits more labor and erudition than any other work written on the same subject, and with the same object, that has ever been published. It is enriched by the most copious references to the Latin authors, its decisions are carefully made, and its results skilfully obtained. It may be a fanciful theory, but we are inclined to believe that the circumstance of the birth-place of its authors was an assistance to them in their labors. Using a language which bears the strongest impress of the Latin, they must have found it more easy to acquaint themselves with ancient forms and idioms, than would critics whose vernacular was a more barbarous tongue.

Mr. Leverett has taken full advantage of the assiduous labor and natural capabilities of Forcellini and Facciolati for his purposes. Where he has used their observations, he has translated them from the Latin in which they originally stood, for only the definitions in the original work were in Italian. He has diminished the size of his book materially, by taking only those parts of quoted phrases and sentences which are immediately applicable to the word or subject under consideration; and in some instances he has omitted the quotations altogether, where there are enough left fully to illustrate the questions raised, and an additional number of instances adds merely to the length, but not to the value or importance of the article. So far, therefore, as he makes use of the Corpus Totius Latinitatis, and he uses it more in some parts of his book than others, he retains what is valu-'