had found no traces of hero songs, but yet that there was evidence that their remotest ancestors had sung them, and where is the people, he asked, that have not sung them? He bad collected a sheaf, as he called it, of simpler songs, of which I possess his translations * * In these songs there is a simple peasant-like nature and something eminently characteristic."-vol. i. p. 87-92.

Of Littavian poetry, not unfrequently confounded with Lettish, Herder's volumes contain several remarkable specimens. The Littavian language has so close an affinity with the Lettish that it would scarcely be right to pass over the literature of Lithuania in complete silence, or to lose the opportunity of enabling our readers to compare their ballads with the simpler songs which have occupied the earlier part of this article. Two will suffice for this purpose.

THE MAIDEN IN HER GARDEN.

Sing cheerily, sweet maid!
Why dost thou answer no!
Hang not on thine arm thy head-
To stone 'twill stiffen so.

How should the maiden sing?

Song is the child of peace→

My garden is a waste,

A very wilderness.

Roses are swept away-
The banks in rains lie;
White lilies trod in clay,-
And all the dews are dry.
Weary, O weary then,
Bearing a faded wreath,

Sadly I turn'd again,

And sank beneath.-vol, i. 111, 112.

In this there is obviously more of refinement in the sentiment and of polish in the expression than in the Lettish compositions. The next is more in the popular strain.

THE LOST BRIDAL RING.

"I rode to the fisher,
I sought out the fisher,
I wish I were his stepson!
And then by the shore I
The wet nets extended,
And wash'd my hand in the water.
Alas! from my finger,
There fell in the water,
My bridal ring fell in the water.
O supplicate, lov'd one,
The wind, the north-wind,
O supplicate weeks, twice counted.
Perchance it has driven

The ring from the bottom
To thy belov'd one's meadow,
Then comes the maiden
Across the meadow,

She comes to the rue-tree garden.
O tarry, thou lov'd one,
Fling down thy sickle,
O fling it among the corn-heaps.
And fling thy whetstone
Among the corn-heaps,

And tarry awhile thou lov'd one.
I thank thee, maiden!
I thank thy coming!
I thank thy pity,
And thy soft language.
Good day! good even!
O kind, kind mother!
Canst thou a bed provide me?

I'll not refuse thee

A bed, but never

Again will I show thee kindness.

Among the theories which have been agitated as to the origin of the Letts, Mr. Parrot in his Versuch einer Entwicklung der Sprache, Abstammung, Geschichte, Mythologie und bürgerliche Verhaltnisse der Liwen, Lätten, Eesten, &c., has put forward the fancy that the Lettish is one of the branches of the great Celtic family. As respects Mr. Parrot and many other writers on the

early history of nations, the old adage Ex nihilo nil fit may be safely translated "Out of any thing any thing," and assuredly all other absurdities shrink into diminutives when compared with the absurdities broached by some authors on the affinities of languages and the deductions they draw from them. They have the art of confounding every thing, of distorting every thing, of understanding every thing. They can show that words the most unlike have in fact the closest resemblance, and can prove to demonstration from his name alone that Mr. Arkwright is a lineal descendant of Noah, or that Eusebius was a pair of spectacles. We knew a learned man and a minister of state in Spain, who wrote a book, a quarto volume, to explain that Gott erbarme ich dein armes Würmchen, was a Cantabrian inscription, at least 2000 years old, and that it celebrated the religious rites performed in a Biscayan temple in that remote period. The simple fact was that a drinking vessel had dropped into a well in Biscay, perhaps a century ago, where it was discovered within our remembrance. It had some rude heads for ornaments and the German prayer as above. Our antiquarian and etymologist at once decided that the heads represented heathen priestesses, and the inscription recorded their religious observances; so with a little torturing and twisting, after some years hard study, he gave his version of it to the astonished world, avowing that the meaning was "The priestesses of the temple pour libations to the god of the sun." In the same ingenious way Mr. Parrot makes out his Celtic etymologies as to the Caucasus. Cauc, says he, Celtic for mountain, as, Celtic for origin, us Celtic for men, what can be clearer Cauc-as-us, to the very letter, mountain of the origin of men; or if that does not please, is there not, quoth he, the Esthonian Käu to go, Kaas company, usse, out, clearly meaning the place whence the company of mankind first went forth? By such guesses any one word in any language may be traced to any other language.

Such volumes become wearisome, and almost indispose one to listen even to the sensible suggestions which sometimes fall from these valorous etymology hunters; and, but for this sort of deformities, Mr. Parrot's book is crowded with very interesting matter. When he gets hold of a word, his faculties are wonderfully bewildered, but he has notwithstanding managed to write very sensibly and eruditely about divers instructive things. Of all perils none are so perilous as those of the man who is chasing derivations, and the course he generally allows himself is unbounded. Authorities are not wanting for shifting every letter in the alphabet, and by this approved and received hocus-pocus any one word may be changed into any other. When Mr. Parrot as

sumes the Biscayan and the Celtic to be kindred tongues—when he confounds the Erse and the Finnish-when, in a word, he is in the lucus a non lucendo humour-it is mere waste of time to be tracking his painful footsteps; but when' laboriously turning over the fragments of traditional or recorded history, he brings forth vivid images of the past-when out of the ruins of obscure bygone times he gathers up materials for future record, and presents a vivid outline, if not a perfect picture, of an obscure and oppressed people-it is impossible not to sympathise with his affections, and to honour his labours. We do not mean that the early part of Mr. Parrot's inquiry, which respects the language of the Lettish people, is wholly without merit. He gives there some curious facts amidst many ludicrous and extravagant guesses. When a man has formed a very decided theory, especially on a subject not susceptible of the most satisfactory evidence, facts get a sort of caoutchouc character, and are very comfortably stretched to meet the projected purpose. But we cannot, at all events here, enter into the remote history and idiom of the Lettish people.

Of the ancient mythology, and religious observances of the Lettish people, Parrot has collected many curious particulars. He says they worshipped a species of Trinity, long before the introduction of Christianity. Their religious services were performed in groves in the open air. Their principal god was named Thorapilla or Thorawivita, who has been sometimes identified with the Thor of the Goths. "He was the thunderer," says Mone," dwelling in woods, where he had his own sacred tree. He is invisible and has the wings of a bird. He is the first producer, and is imaged by the sun. They fancied that he had quitted their country to withdraw to the island of Oesel, when Christianity introduced to them a new divinity. They worshipped fire as the representative of the deity, which they kept continually burning on the tops of the highest mountains. In thunder-storms the priests held assemblies to ascertain the will of the divinity, which they proclaimed to their followers." The habit of sacrificing animals to their divinities continued even as late as the end of the seventeenth century, when it was visited with very severe penalties by Frederick the Second of Prussia. Meletius has preserved the prayer addressed to Pergubri, the third person of the Trinity, on the day of his festival. "O Pergubri! thou it is that sendest the winter away, and bringest back the beautiful spring. It is thou who coverest the hedges and the meadows with green, and claddest the hedges and the forest with leaves."

The hospitality of the Lettish people was early celebrated. Duisburg says of them in his Chronicle-" They treat their

guests with all possible hospitality, and have neither food nor drink in their dwellings which they do not bring forward."* They punished robbery with death, though we find in the thirteenth century that the murderer was released on the payment of a fine. Polygamy was practised among them. Death in combat was deemed highly honourable. They burnt their dead, and says the Chronicle" Exequias cum lamentationibus et potationibus multis more suo celebrabant."-cap. v. pars ii. Their personal property, their arms, their hunting instruments, and sometimes even their wives, were burnt at their funeral pile. Their ashes were gathered into urns, and tumuli raised over those of their most distinguished men. Their dress was simple, their sports hunting and fishing. They were unacquainted with alphabetic writing, and recorded events on pieces of wood in characters universally understood among themselves. Of these ancient proverbs a few have come down even to our days, and with some of these, the concentrated wisdom of a people, we must conclude these disjecta membra.

A true child weeps before the fire-place-a bastard behind the door. (i. e. Nobody cares about illegitimate children.)

You cannot make a soup out of a handsome face.

It is not every cock that is perched.

Wet land wants no water.

Boast not of the day till the day is come to an end.

Two hands upon the breast, and labour is past.-(i. e. Death is come.)

To taste the sweet you must eat the bitter.

Sing a good song twice.

Where is the wolf's nest in winter?

Death can take nothing from an empty room.

Youth sows, age reaps.

Women have long hair, but short thoughts.

ART. IV. 1. Römische Geschichte. Von B. G. Niebuhr. Zweiter Theil. Zweite völlig umgearbeitete Ausgabe. (Roman History. By B. G. Niebuhr. Second Volume. Second completely re-modelled Edition.) Berlin. 1830. 8vo. 2. Ueber die Entstehung, Entwickelung und Ausbildung des Bürgerrechts im alten Rom. (On the Origin, Development and Improvement of Civic Rights in Ancient Rome.) Von Dr. W. Eisendecker. Hamburgh. 1829. 8vo.

THREE years have now elapsed since it was our grateful task to communicate to the British public the earliest account of the first

Hospitibus suis omnem humanitatem quam possunt, ostendunt, nec sunt in domo suo esculenta vel potulenta quæ non communicent eis illa vice."

volume of the re-modelled edition of Niebuhr's Roman History. With joyful anticipation we then looked forward to the speedy appearance of the second volume, which the author intimated stood in need of but little alteration, and to that of the succeeding volumes at reasonable intervals. Time flowed on without our hopes being realized; we heard with dismay, a feeling doubtless shared by every scholar, of the conflagration of Niebuhr's dwelling, were cheered by his public assurance that, though a part of the perfected manuscript had been lost, the collected materials for the history, down at least to the first Punic War, had been saved, that his spirit was unbroken, and his zeal undiminished. At length the second volume made its appearance in a totally re-modelled form, but scarcely had we had time to peruse and to admire it, when tidings of the death of its illustrious author overwhelmed us with regret, and, we feel no shame to say it, made the very sight of his work disagreeable to us for a season. Niebuhr is dead, and has not left his fellow behind him. His immortal work remains a monument of the vanity of human designs and expectations. Twenty years ago, in the vigour of life and full of confidence in his mighty powers and resources, he announced his intention of tracing the history of Rome" from the night of remote antiquity, in which all that the most anxious inquiry could aspire to, was to discern the chief masses of society in ancient Italy, down to the period when a second night buried in almost equal darkness all that had been seen to arise, grow old and decay." After some years of reflection he saw that this plan, considering his mode of treating his subjects, was too extensive, and he fixed his goal where the Roman "people had incorporated millions with itself, and had imparted to them its language and its laws; where it ruled from the rising unto the setting sun, and the last of the kingdoms that proceeded from Alexander's conquests was become one of its provinces." Such was his language in 1827, and such the goal which he reasonably set to his labours; but Dis aliter visum, he has reached no farther goal than a little beyond the capture of the city by the Gauls. The "Roman History" remains a magnificent and highly finished portion of a grand design; it is no Torso, no ruin of whose restoration we might despair, but entire and complete as far as it goes; the architect has left his plan and a perfect specimen of his mode of execution; he who planned and commenced the erection of St. Peter's, we should recollect, was not the same with him who brought the edifice to its termination. Though we do not believe that there is any man at present in Europe adequate to continuing the Roman History in a manner corresponding to what has been done by Niebuhr himself, yet we are convinced that such a man will arise;