refore；　to　pronounce　Demosthenes　profligate　and　insincere？　　Surely　not。　　Do　we　not　perpetually　see　men　of　the　greatest　talents　and　the　purest　intentions　misled　by　national　or　factious　prejudices？　　The　most　respectable　people　in　England　were；　little　more　than　forty　years　ago；　in　the　habit　of　uttering　the　bitterest　abuse　against　Washington　and　Franklin。　　It　is　certainly　to　be　regretted　that　men　should　err　so　grossly　in　their　estimate　of　character。　　But　no　person　who　knows　anything　of　human　nature　will　impute　such　errors　to　depravity。
  Mr　Mitford　is　not　more　consistent　with　himself　than　with　reason。　Though　he　is　the　advocate　of　all　oligarchies；　he　is　also　a　warm　admirer　of　all　kings；　and　of　all　citizens　who　raised　themselves　to　that　species　of　sovereignty　which　the　Greeks　denominated　tyranny。　　If　monarchy；　as　Mr　Mitford　holds；　be　in　itself　a　blessing；　democracy　must　be　a　better　form　of　government　than　aristocracy；　which　is　always　opposed　to　the　supremacy；　and　even　to　the　eminence；　of　individuals。　　On　the　other　hand；　it　is　but　one　step　that　separates　the　demagogue　and　the　sovereign。
  If　this　article　had　not　extended　itself　to　so　great　a　length；　I　should　offer　a　few　observations　on　some　other　peculiarities　of　this　writer；his　general　preference　of　the　Barbarians　to　the　Greeks；his　predilection　for　Persians；　Carthaginians；　Thracians；　for　all　nations；　in　short；　except　that　great　and　enlightened　nation　of　which　he　is　the　historian。　　But　I　will　confine　myself　to　a　single　topic。
  Mr　Mitford　has　remarked；　with　truth　and　spirit；　that　〃any　history　perfectly　written；　but　especially　a　Grecian　history　perfectly　written　should　be　a　political　institute　for　all　nations。〃　　It　has　not　occurred　to　him　that　a　Grecian　history；　perfectly　written；　should　also　be　a　complete　record　of　the　rise　and　progress　of　poetry；　philosophy；　and　the　arts。　　Here　his　work　is　extremely　deficient。　　Indeed；　though　it　may　seem　a　strange　thing　to　say　of　a　gentleman　who　has　published　so　many　quartos；　Mr　Mitford　seems　to　entertain　a　feeling；　bordering　on　contempt；　for　literary　and　speculative　pursuits。　　The　talents　of　action　almost　exclusively　attract　his　notice；　and　he　talks　with　very　complacent　disdain　of　〃the　idle　learned。〃　　Homer；　indeed；　he　admires；　but　principally；　I　am　afraid；　because　he　is　convinced　that　Homer　could　neither　read　nor　write。　　He　could　not　avoid　speaking　of　Socrates；　but　he　has　been　far　more　solicitous　to　trace　his　death　to　political　causes；　and　to　deduce　from　it　consequences　unfavourable　to　Athens；　and　to　popular　governments；　than　to　throw　light　on　the　character　and　doctrines　of　the　wonderful　man；
  〃From　whose　mouth　issued　forth　Mellifluous　streams　that　watered　all　the　schools　Of　Academics；　old　and　new；　with　those　Surnamed　Peripatetics；　and　the　sect　Epicurean；　and　the　Stoic　severe。〃
  He　does　not　seem　to　be　aware　that　Demosthenes　was　a　great　orator；　he　represents　him　sometimes　as　an　aspirant　demagogue；　sometimes　as　an　adroit　negotiator；　and　always　as　a　great　rogue。　　But　that　in　which　the　Athenian　excelled　all　men　of　all　ages；　that　irresistible　eloquence；　which　at　the　distance　of　more　than　two　thousand　years　stirs　our　blood；　and　brings　tears　into　our　eyes；　he　passes　by　with　a　few　phrases　of　commonplace　commendation。　　The　origin　of　the　drama；　the　doctrines　of　the　sophists；　the　course　of　Athenian　education；　the　state　of　the　arts　and　sciences；　the　whole　domestic　system　of　the　Greeks；　he　has　almost　completely　neglected。　　Yet　these　things　will　appear；　to　a　reflecting　man；　scarcely　less　worthy　of　attention　than　the　taking　of　Sphacteria　or　the　discipline　of　the　targeteers　of　Iphicrates。
  This；　indeed；　is　a　deficiency　by　no　means　peculiar　to　Mr　Mitford。　Most　people　seem　to　imagine　that　a　detail　of　public　occurrences　the　operations　of　sieges…the　changes　of　administrationsthe　treatiesthe　conspiraciesthe　rebellionsis　a　complete　history。　　Differences　of　definition　are　logically　unimportant；　but　practically　they　sometimes　produce　the　most　momentous　effects。　　Thus　it　has　been　in　the　present　case。　　Historians　have；　almost　without　exception；　confined　themselves　to　the　public　transactions　of　states；　and　have　left　to　the　negligent　administration　of　writers　of　fiction　a　province　at　least　equally　extensive　and　valuable。
  All　wise　statesmen　have　agreed　to　consider　the　prosperity　or　adversity　of　nations　as　made　up　of　the　happiness　or　misery　of　individuals；　and　to　reject　as　chimerical　all　notions　of　a　public　interest　of　the　community；　distinct　from　the　interest　of　the　component　parts。　　It　is　therefore　strange　that　those　whose　office　it　is　to　supply　statesmen　with　examples　and　warnings　should　omit；　as　too　mean　for　the　dignity　of　history；　circumstances　which　exert　the　most　extensive　influence　on　the　state　of　society。　　In　general；　the　under　current　of　human　life　flows　steadily　on；　unruffled　by　the　storms　which　agitate　the　surface。　　The　happiness　of　the　many　commonly　depends　on　causes　independent　of　victories　or　defeats；　of　revolutions　or　restorations；causes　which　can　be　regulated　by　no　laws；　and　which　are　recorded　in　no　archives。　These　causes　are　the　things　which　it　is　of　main　importance　to　us　to　know；　not　how　the　Lacedaemonian　phalanx　was　broken　at　Leuctra；not　whether　Alexander　died　of　poison　or　by　disease。　History；　without　these；　is　a　shell　without　a　kernel；　and　such　is　almost　all　the　history　which　is　extant　in　the　world。　　Paltry　skirmishes　and　plots　are　reported　with　absurd　and　useless　minuteness；　but　improvements　the　most　essential　to　the　comfort　of　human　life　extend　themselves　over　the　world；　and　introduce　themselves　into　every　cottage；　before　any　annalist　can　condescend；　from　the　dignity　of　writing　about　generals　and　ambassadors；　to　take　the　least　notice　of　them。　　Thus　the　progress　of　the　most　salutary　inventions　and　discoveries　is　buried　in　impenetrable　mystery；　mankind　are　deprived　of　a　most　useful　species　of　knowledge；　and　their　benefactors　of　their　honest　fame。　In　the　meantime　every　child　knows　by　heart　the　dates　and　adventures　of　a　long　line　of　barbarian　kings。　　The　history　of　nations；　in　the　sense　in　which　I　use　the　word；　is　often　best　studied　in　works　not　professedly　historical。　　Thucydides；　as　far　as　he　goes；　is　an　excellent　writer；　yet　he　affords　us　far　less　knowledge　of　the　most　important　particulars　relating　to　Athens　than　Plato　or　Aristophanes。　　The　little　treatise　of　Xenophon　on　Domestic　Economy　contains　more　historical　information　than　all　the　seven　books　of　his　Hellenics。　　The　same　may　be　said　of　the　Satires　of　Horace；　of　the　Letters　of　Cicero；　of　the　novels　of　Le　Sage；　of　the　memoirs　of　Marmontel。　　Many　others　might　be　mentioned；　but　these　sufficiently　illustrate　my　meaning。
  I　would　hope　that　there　may　yet　appear　a　writer　who　may　despise　the　present　narrow　limits；　and　assert　the　rights　of　history　over　every　part　of　her　natural　domain。　　Should　such　a　writer　engage　in　that　enterprise；　in　which　I　cannot　but　consider　Mr　Mitford　as　having　failed；　he　will　record；　indeed；　all　that　is　interesting　and　important　in　military　and　political　transactions；　but　he　will　not　think　anything　too　trivial　for　the　gravity　of　history　which　is　not　too　trivial　to　promote　or　diminish　the　happiness　of　man。　He　will　portray　in　vivid　colours　the　domestic　society；　the　manners；　the　amusements；　the　conversation　of　the　Greeks。　　He　will　not　disdain　to　discuss　the　state　of　agriculture；　of　the　mechanical　arts；　and　of　the　conveniences　of　life。　　The　progress　of　painting；　of　sculpture；　and　of　architecture；　will　form　an　important　part　of　his　plan。　　But；　above　all；　his　attention　will　be　given　to　the　history　of　that　splendid　literature　from　which　has　sprung　all　the　strength；　the　wisdom；　the　freedom；　and　the　glory；　of　the　western　world。
  Of　the　indifference　which　Mr　Mitford　shows　on　this　subject　I　will　not　speak；　for　I　cannot　speak　with　fairness。　　It　is　a　subject　on　which　I　love　to　forget　the　accuracy　of　a　judge；　in　the　veneration　of　a　worshipper　and　the　gratitude　of　a　child。　　If　we　consider　merely　the　subtlety　of　disquisition；　the　force　of　imagination；　the　perfect　energy　and　elegance　of　expression　which　characterise　the　great　works　of　Athenian　genius；　we　must　pronounce　them　intrinsically　most　valuable；　but　what　shall　we　say　when　we　reflect　that　from　hence　have　sprung　directly　or　indirectly；　all　the　noblest　creations　of　the　human　intellect；　that　from　hence　were　the　vast　accomplishments　and　the　brilliant　fancy　of　Cicero；　the　withering　fire　of　Juvenal；　the　plastic　imagination　of　Dante；　the　humour　of　Cervantes；　the　comprehension　of　Bacon；　the　wit　of　Butler；　the　supreme　and　universal　excellence　of　Shakspeare？　　All　the　triumphs　of　truth　and　genius　over　prejudice　and　power；　in　every　country　and　in　every　age；　have　been　the　triumphs　of　Athens。　Wherever　a　few　great　minds　have　made　a　stand　against　violence　and　fraud；　in　the　cause　of　liberty　and　reason；　there　has　been　her　spirit　in　the　midst　of　them；　inspiring；　encouraging；　consoling；　by　the　lonely　lamp　of　Erasmus；　by　the　restless　bed　of　Pascal；　in　the　tribune　of　Mirabeau；　in　the　cell　of　Galileo；　on　the　scaffold　of　Sidney。　　But　who　shall　estimate　her　influence　on　private　happiness？　　Who　shall　say　how　many　thousands　have　been　made　wiser；　happier；　and　better；　by　those　pursuits　in　which　she　has　taught　mankind　to　engage：　　to　how　many　the　studies　which　took　their