riod, extended from the Eyder to the Rhine*, if not to the Scheldt +, and that it is highly probable that adventurers failed in queft of the British fleece from many other parts befides the Cimbric Cherfonefus."

In this extract we have the fame fpirit of thinking, and the fame maze of metaphors, as before. Mr. Turner is caught with the glitter of his own language, and purfues it even to the confufion of his own movements. He thus denominates the Saxon invaders, Allemanni or Germans, Frifians, Francs, and Sclavenfes. But then he denominates them fo varyingly from himself and from Bede, upon the credit of the multiplied atteftations, that he produces in his notes. "The Anglo-Saxons," he has told us in his very first words, however he may contradict himself here,—

"were the people, who, in different divifions, transported themfelves from the Cimbric Peninfula and its vicinity into England. They were branches of the great Saxon confederation, which from the Elbe extended itfelf at laft to the Rhine. When Rome admitted the barbaric myriads to partition her moft valuable provinces, the AngloSaxons feized Britain as their poils ‡." And, as to Bede here cited with other hiftorians, we need only notice, that Mr. Carte anticipated Mr. Turner in adducing them for witneffes, and that an author familiar to Mr. Turner has long fince precluded their teftimony. The Frifians formed no part of the German adventurers, "that came into Britain," faid the author, in oppofition to Mr. Carte; and Bede's teftimony is decifive againft it. The Germans, that fettled in the islands, were compofed only of Jutes, Angles, and proper" Saxons. Advenerant de tribus Germaniæ populis fortioribus, id eft, Saxonibus, Anglis, Jutis.' And we might as well add any other nation of maritime Germany to them, as the Frifians.

"Against fuch an authority as this," continues the author, "the affertions of Ubo Emmins and Procopius," both cited here by Mr. Turner, " are equally feeble. Emmius is too late a writer to know any thing of the matter. The fecretary of the Emperor Juftinian alfo lay at too great a diftance, half the globe interpofing between Britain and Conftantinople, to know any thing diftinctly concerning

* “The progreffion, diminution, and augmentation of the Saxon power are ftated by Spener, who diftinguishes it into four viciffitudes, Saxonia Tranfalbina, S. Cifalbina, S. Maxima, and S. Ultima, P. 361. In his fecond part, PP. 399-412, he exhibits its State in the fixth century."

"Befides Emilius Stoke, whofe Chronicle we quoted in the firft book, Colinus alfo mentions, that Lower Saxony reached to Belgium.

• De lande die gelagen

Tuffen maer-zee ende Nymagen

Rien en Mafe en Torp affen

+ P. I.

Al die Goyen heten Neer-Saffen.' Cannieg. r. 67."

1

B 2

it.

it. And the wildness of his account confirms the affertions, as he in fórms us of what we know to be abfolutely falfe, that in his time there were three very numerous nations in Britain, each governed by its own fovereign, and called Angles, Frifians, and Britons."

"But Mr. Carte remarks," as this author goes on, "that Bede himself reckons the Frifians among the nations from whom the English are defcended. So he does feveral others, that must therefore be equally reckoned for our progenitors." Egbert, he fays," in a paffage cited alfo in part by Mr. Turner," refolved verbum Dei aliquibus earum, quæ nondum audierant, gentibus evangelizando committere, quarum in Germaniâ plurimas noverat effe nationes, a quibus Angli vel Saxoni, qui nunc Britanniam incolunt genus et originem duxiffe nofcuntur: unde hactenus a vicinâ gente Brittonum corrupté Germani nuncupantur,' juft as Talieffin and Golyzan in Mr. Turner's appeals, denominate them Alemannic or Germans. "According to Mr. Carte's," and Mr. Turner's" interpretation of the paffage, the Rugini, the Danes, the Hunns, and the Boructuarii were equally our ancestors, with the Frifians. But, as this is too abfurd to be affirmed," though Mr. Turner, by his note, and his citation does indirectly affirm it, however, abfurd, "we maft look out for fome other construction of the words. And the only true one is what is most obvious, and this, that there are feveral nations in Germany, ftill profeffing heathenifm, which, as Germans, were of the fame general lineage with our ancestors. There is no exception made in favour of the Frifians. Nor are they marked as more allied (to the English, than any of the others. And, indeed, our peculiar anceftors in Germany, the old Saxons, are exprefsly differenced by Bede, here from the Frifians, and all the reft.

"In the fame fenfe alfo," adds the fame author, "is Marcellinus to be understood, who is quoted from Emmius by Mr. Carte" and by Mr. Turner. "And, however, he may feem at first to speak to the purpofe for which he is cited by both, yet on a fair examination of his account and a collation of it with other notices of hiftory, he appears only to mean the fame that Bede has been fhewn to mean be fore him. His words, as they appear in Emmius (P. 41), are thefe, fpeaking of Suidbert, who went from England to convert the pagan Germans, he fays; Ipfe Suidbertus fitiebat falutem omnium hominum, et præcipué paganorum Frifiorum et Saxonum, có quód Angli ex ipfis propagati fint.' And, fpeaking of Suidbert and the accom panying apoftles, he adds that, quoniam fancti doctores propagati fuerunt in Angliâ de ftirpe Frifonicâ et Saxonicâ, ideó convenienter fitierunt eis prædicare evangelium Chrifti Linguâ Germanicâ.' "Here the Frifians and Saxons feem to be made by Marcellinus the parents of the English. And fo as we have just now feen, are the Frifians, Danes, Hunns, old Saxons, Rugini, and Boructuarii by Bede; nationes, a quibus Angli vel Saxones qui nunc Britanniam incolunt genus et originem duxiffe nofcuntur, funt Frifones, Rugini,' &c. "All these are as explicitly declared the founders of the English nation by the one, as two of them are by the other. And yet the very author, who has attributed our origin to all, has ex

6

prefsly

prefsly affirmed us to be defcended only from the Jutes, the Angles, and the Saxons. As Germans in general, we are defcended from all. As English in particular, we are the derivatives of these three nations only *,, y*.'

From this paffage in a work, repeatedly appealed to by Mr. Turner, his fuggeftions here, however contrary to his own affertions before, had been previously made by Mr. Carte and previously refuted by Mr. Carte's examiner. Mr. Turner, therefore, must have forgotten when he made them, not merely that they had been made before, but that they had before been refuted alfo. And we go on to another extract, formed under better aufpices and profecuted to a better conclufion.

"Amongst the defenders of Britain," against the Saxons, adds Mr. Turner," one proud name exifts, which is more familiar to mankind than any other, and which has too long engroffed attention, to be haftily paffed over. Into fuch a gigantic port has Arthur been magnified, that he beftrides Europe, and by his immeasurable greatnefs almost defies our comprehenfion t. The glance of man cannot traverse the endless Coloffus, magic firft gifted with life, and by death not fhrouded from the confcious world, but extolled into a glaring phantom, whofe fword reached from Scandinavia to Spain, and before whom all the monarchs of the east and weft," though the Coloffus is faid, inftantly before, to beftride Europe only, "with their defeated armies and fubjected nations, fell humbly proftrate.

"Yet, however distorted by his difproportionate magnitude, the distinguished rank which Arthur has for ages occupied in the fongs and tales, not only of his own friends and their defcendants, but of his neighbours and enemies, forbids us to fuffer him to fleep forgotten in his Avallonian tomb. Was it to be expunged from paft existence, as well as from memory, that he and his proud knights filled England, Scotland, France, and Denmark with their triumphs, and Caerleon with philofophers? For this did the kings of Greece and Africa," when Arthur beftrode Europe alone as a Coloffus juft before,

of Spain and Parthia," the European Coloffus having ftretched one leg into Africa first, and then shifted it to Afia," of Phrygia and Egypt, of Iturea and Babylon, march in union with the Roman Generals to be destroyed by his Caliburno, which no armour could refift ? For this did he proftrate 840 enemies in one battle with his fingle arm? For this did Merlin conftruct that enchanted table, which the glory of its order has fo renowned; which three great cities in Britain witneffed (though an inviduous neighbour transfers it to Charlemagne), and prefent him with that steely dragon, who breathed in flames from his fearful ftandard? For this did the compaffionate

* Many references to many notes in the Appendix are here omitged. Rev.

+ Whitaker's Hiftory of Manchefter, Vol. XI. P. 541, quarto,

B 3

Morgana

Morgana tranfport, by her fairy power, the hero dying by treachery into the ifland of Avallonia to heal his wounds, monopolize his attentions, and in fome future age restore him to the world? Awake ye heroes who have fo long vibrated on the harps of Cambria and Bretagné, found fiercely your buffalo horns, and pafs once more before us in review, while your infpired bards, Talieffin, Myrzin, Melchin, and he who in your palace lived the difcontented gueft, the mournful, time-honoured Llywarch Hen, extend the horns of mead, proclaim your ftupendous deeds, and immortalize Carduel, Caerleon, Cardigan, and Camelot."

From this ftrain fo natural to the romances here allufively glanced at, and fo congenial (we must add) to the fervid imagination of the author, he goes by degrees to the ftern fobriety of hiftory. "Four

of the twelve battles of Arthur," he tells us," have been ably il luftrated by Mr. Whitaker *. Mr. Camden and others had remarked, that the Douglafs, on which Nennius had placed them, was a river in Lancashire. The hiftorian of Manchetter has commented on the pofitions of thefe conflicts with great local knowledge; his fancy, though often too prolific, and even on this portion of our history, brilliantly active, yet defcribes thefe with fo much probability, that we may adopt his sketches as hiftory.

"The battle of Badon + Mount has been celebrated as his greatest and most useful atchievement; a long interval of repofe to the Britons has been announced as its confequence; yet it is curious to remark, that this mighty victory only checked the progrefs of Cerdic, and does not appear to have produced any further fuccefs. We hear not of the vindictive purfuit of Arthur, of the invasion of Hampshire, or the danger of Cerdic. The Saxon was penetrating onwards even towards Wales or Mercia; he was defeated, and did not advance. No other conficts enfued. Arthur was content to repaife. This muft have been because he wanted power to purfue. Arthur was, therefore, not the warrior of irrefiftible ftrength; he permitted Cerdic to retain his fettlements at Weffex, and fuch an acquicfcence accredits

*Hift. Manch. Vol. II. P. 43-45.”

+ " Badon has been generally fuppofed to have been the city of Bath. John of Tinmouth fo explains it, quæ nunc Bathonia vocatur. Ulher c. 13. P. 476. Humphrey Lhuyd, a Cambro-Briton, in his Commentarioli Britanniæ Defcrip. Frag. P. 16. fays, the Britons called Bath Caer Badon, and Bristol Caer Oder yn naut [nant] Badon, in Badon valley. There are many hills about Bath and Briftol. Baz and bazen in Welfh fignify a bath. Mr. Whitakor prefers Bradbury Caftle, in another county.. 2. Manchefter, P. 57." He might well do fo, as he fays, the caftle has "Badbury hill upon one fide, Badbury village on a fecond, and that of Baydon or Badon more diftantly on a third." The caftle is alfo on a hill, when Bath is in a bottom. Bath will thus anfwer by contraries only, to the "Badon Mount" or "Mons Badonicus" of the history. Rev. the

the Chronicle, which afferts, that after many fierce conflicts, hè conceded to the Saxon the counties of Southampton and Somerfet*.

"This state of moderate greatness fuits the character, in which the Welsh bards exhibit Arthur; they commemorate him, but it is not with that excelling glory with which he has been furrounded by fubfequent traditions. One fact is fufficient to refute all the hyperboles of Jeffry. Though Arthur lived and fought, yet the Anglo-Saxons, were not driven from the island, but gradually advanced their conquefts, with progreffive dominion, whether he was alive or whether he was dead t.Reflecting on this unquestionable fact, we may hefitate to believe that Arthur was victorious in all his battles ‡, becaufe, if he wielded the whole force of Britain, and only fought to conquer, which refcued Cerdic, Ella, the fon of Hengift, and the invaders of Effex and Eaft-Anglia, from abfolute deftruction?"

All this is very judiciously faid in general, and does honour to the critical fagacity of Mr. Turner. We except only to twą points in the whole. The Welsh bards exhibit Arthur, we were before told, "not with that excelling glory with which he has been furrounded by fubfequent traditions ;" and we are told now, rr we may hefitate to believe that Arthur was victorious in all his battles." Nennius appears to have been cotemporary with Arthur §. Yet from him, and not from "fubfequent traditions," has been primarily derived, "that excelling glory with which he has been furrounded." He informs us, that " though there were many of the people more noble than he," meaning Ambrofius and others unknown, " yet twelve times was he the leader of the battle, and a

"Rad. quoted by Polychronicon, fays, in quibufdam chronicis legitur, quod tandem Arthurus extædiatus, poft 26 annum adventus Cerdici fidelitate fibi juratâ dedit ei Hamptefhiram et Somerfetam, F. 224. The chronicle of Ricardi Divifionenfis, in MSS. at Cambridge, affirms the fame. It is quoted by Langhorn, Chron. Rer. Anglorum, P. 70."

Is not this a mere Hibernifm?" fought," yet the Saxons advanced in was alive or whether he was dead." Rev.

to us.

Though Arthur lived and their conquefts, whether he It feems an extraordinary one:

# "Nennius, c. 62, fays this, in omnibus bellis victor extitit.' But Rad. quoted by Polychronicon, 224, fays more probably of Cerdic, who often fought with Arthur," an affumption gratuitously. made, and not true in itself, fi femel vinceretur, aliâ vice acrior furrexit ad pugnam.' Gildas, S. 26, implies an alternation of victory previous to the battle of Bath. "The MSS. Chron. Divis. eited by Langhorn, 70, affirms it." But, unlefs this Chronicler "affirmed," or that Gildas, "implied," Arthur to have been per→ fonally engaged as the General in these battles of alternate defeat and victory; their evidence is all foreign to the point. Rev.

§ Whitaker's Hift. Manch. Vol. H. p. 33.

B 4

Conquerer