« PreviousContinue »
less, where the blood undergoes fome salutary changes from the Spiracula, which are extended over all parts of their bodies. It may be said, that these terms are not intended for the amphibia, or cold-blooded animals, but are calculated to express the difference between them and animals with warm blood. But is not this in direct opposition to the plan and intention of the author, who proposes to adopt terms which will admit of a general appli. cation to all parts of the animal kingdom ?
Some difficulty strikes us, when we apply these new terms to the fætus in utero. In this case, the right auricle and ventricle must be called both pulmonic and systemic ; because the auricle fends some of its blood through the foramen ovale, and the ventricle through the ductus arteriosus, to the system at large. To any one already acquainted with the difference between the circulation in the fætus and the adult, this may appear intelligible ; but it does not seem calculated to simplify the description of this intricate part of anatomy, or to render it more easily comprehended by young students. The vessels which convey blood from the lungs to the system at large, form but an inconsiderable part of the circulation in the foetus, and therefore deserve not the title of systemic, according to the definition which is given. The umbilical vein would rather lay claim to this epithet, as it carries blood of a red colour, after it has undergone fome necessary changes in the placenta. The vena porta, too, will be both a systemic and pulmonic vesel; because it serves indirectly to convey the blood from the lungs to the liver, for a purpose very important to the system at large, the secretion of the bile; while, at the same time, it conveys a considerable portion of blood from the abdominal viscera to the lungs. It may be objected, that the hepatic artery is the systemic veflel of the liver ; but the relative offices of this artery, and the vena porta, are not yet so well understood, as to lead us to such a distinction.
Where the etymology of a word will assist in explaining the situation or function of any part, it ought surely to be preferred. For although the technical meaning may be determined by a definition, yet it is difficult to divest ourselves of the idea which the etymology conveys. Thus, to talk of the pulmonic veffels of the leg and arm, must appear strange to any one who had ever heard of the vessels of the heart and lungs which have received that name. No reason is alleged for making the particular term pulmonic a general one, or for rendering a word particular, whose strict meaning is general. All the vessels of the body might be called systemic, as forming a part of the whole system ; but few of them can properly be termed pulmonic, because a small number only belong to the lungs. Perhaps it would have been better to have suggested two new terms, which had never been in use, if any new
terms are necessary, for expressing the arterial and venous circulation. But it has been already observed, that no alterations in • nanies should be made, unless absolutely required ; since nothing impedes the diffusion of knowledge more, than the multiplicity of technical terms, and variety of nomenclature. Therefore, we hurbly conceive, as the terms Systemic and pulmonic do not adinit of general application to all the lower animals; as they appear to involve some ambiguity in their etymological sense ; and as they do not promise any great advantages from their use, they ought not to be adopted, to the exclusion of those wellknown terms, the arteries and veins.
After having given this general fetch of Dr Barclay's Effay, we shall not detain our readers by following him through all his other curious and interesting remarks, on several miscellaneous subjects. He sugests new terms for describing the lead and face in different animals, which appear extremely correct and Satisfactory. By slight changes in the termination of the new words, they are made to expreis, clearly and accurately, all the necessary modifications of which their general meaning is suiceptible. When they end in al or an, they denote fimply position or aspect: by changing their termination into en, they express a different sort of connexion ; and when they end in ad, They are used adverbially. Sound is a quality much less important than fense ; yet it is not wholly to be dilregarded. Some perfons may therefore be offended by the cacophony produced by words with such harih terminations. Examples may indeed be adduced from the Greek, French, and German languages, in favour of words terminating in en and ad; but it must be remembered, that the harshness is here foftened by the pronunciation, or by the arrangement which their inversions allow. In our own language, some of these terminations may be found; but these are chiefly in monosyllables, or in the participles of some verbs. *Thcre objections can be of no weight to technical terms, and if they are found sufficiently expreflive, the ear and the vocal organs will soon be reconciled to their use. For various illuftrations of the different suggestions that have been noticed in this outline, we must refer to the work itself; which contains also some plates, with the new artificial signs marked upon the skeleton, to exhibit more concisely their meaning and design.
With regard to the style of Dr Barclay's tract, it is upon the whole fufficiently perspicuous; though perhaps, in several respects, somewhat more adorned, and even a little more learned, than the nature of the subject required. A few inaccuracies have arrested our eye in a work upon language. Vocables (page 93), is
hey are founds can be of io in the partic
neither French nor English. Nomenclaturing (page 109), is like. wife a new word. In page 142, will is twice used for fball. And we scarcely approve of mediums (page 97), and craniums (page 147).
Art. X. Amadis de Gaul. By Vasco Lobeyra. From the Spanish
Verfion of Garciordonez de Montalvo. Ey Robert Southey. Four Volumes 12mo. London,
Amadis de Gaul: A Poem, in Three Books. Freely Translated from
the First Part of the French Vertion of Nicolas de Herberay, Sieur des Eflars. With Notes, by William Stewart Rose, Efa. 12mo. London.
The fame of Amadis de Gaul has reached to the prefent day,
1 and has indeed become almost provincial in most languages of Europe. But this distinction has been attained rather in a mortifying manner : for the hero scems much less indebted for his present renown to his hiftorians, Lobeira, Montalvo, and Herberay, than to Cervantes, who selected their labours, as one of the best known books of Chivalry, and therefore the most prominent object for his ridicule. In this case, as in many others, the renown of the victor has carried down to posterity the memory of the vanquished; and, 'excepting the few students of black Letter, we believe no reader is acquainted with Amadis de Gaul, otherwise than as the prototype of Don Quixote de la Mancha. But the ancient knight feems now in a fair way of being rescued from this degrading state of notoriety, and of once more resuming a claim to public notice upon his own proper merits ; having, with singular good fortune, engaged in his cause two fuch au. thors as Mr Southey and Mr Rose. As the subject of the two articles before us, is in fact the same, we shall adopt the profe version of Mr Southey, as forming the fullest text for the general commentaries which we have to offer; reserving till the conclufion, the particular remarks which occur to us upon Mr Rose's poem.
Mr Gouthey has prefixed to his tranlation certain preliminary notices, which, by an odd and rather affected arrangement, he has split into sections or chapters, numbered it, 2d, 3d, &c.; a division which is the more arbitrary, as no titles are given to these fections. Many readers, thus left to conjecture the causes and purpose of the arrangement, must find themselves at a loss; and we readily confess ourselves to be of the number: for an un
. . broken
broken inquiry respecting the author of Amadis, occupies most of the paragraphs thus unnecessarily detached from each other. This inquiry, particularly connected as it stands with the history of romance in general, has claim to our peculiar attention.
The earliest copy of Amadis de Gaul, now known to exist, is the Spanish edition of Garcia Ordognez de Montalvo, which is used by Mr Southey in his translation. Montalvo profeffes, in general terms, to have revised and corrected this celebrated work from the ancient authorities. He is supposed principally to have used the version of Vasco de Lobeira, a Portuguese knight who died in the beginning of the 15th century. But a dispute has arisen, whether even Lobeira can justly claim the merit of being the original author of this famous and interesting romance. Nicolas de Herberay, who translated Montalvo's work into French in 1575, asserts positively, that it was originally written in that language; and adds this remarkable passage: 'J'en ay trouvé encores quelques refte d'un vieil livre escrit à la inain en inngage Picard, sur lequel j'efime que les Espagnols ont fait leur traduction, non pas de tout Juyvant le vrai original, comme l'on pourra veoir par cestuy, car ilz en ont obmis en aucuns endroits et augmenté aux autres.' Mr Southey, however, setting totally aside the evidence of Herberay, as well as of Monsieur de Treffan, who also affirms the existence of a Picard original of Amadis, is decidedly of opinion, that Vasco de Lobeira was the original author. It is with some helitation that we venture to differ , from Mr Southey, knowing, as we well know, that his acquaintance with the Portuguese litera. ture entitles him to considerable deference in such an argument : yet, viewing the matter on the proofs he has produced, and confidering also the general history and progress of romantic composition, we incline strongly to think with Mr Rose, that the story of Amadis is originally of French extraction.
The earliest tales of romance which are known to us, are uniformly in verle; and this was very natural; for they were in a great measure the compolition of the minstrels, who gained their livelihood by chanting and reciting them. This is peculiarly true of the French minitrels, as appears from the well-known quotation of Du Cangé from the Romance of Du Guesclin, where the champions of romantic fiction are enumerated as the subject of their lays.
There There are but very few prose books of chivalry in the world, which are not either itill extant, or are at least known to have exifted originally in the form of metrical romances. The yery name by which such compofitions are distinguisheid, is derived from the res mance or corrupted Latin employed by the minstrels, and long lige nified any history or fable narrated in vulgar poetry. It would be almost endless to cite examples of this proposition. The Tales of Arthur and his Round Table, by far the most fertile source of the romances of chivalry, are all known to have existed as me. trical compositions long before the publication of the prose folios on the same subje&. These poems the minstrels used to chang at folemn festivals : nor was it till the decay of that extraordinary profesion that romances in prose were substituted for their lays. The invention of printing hastened the declension of poetical romance. The sort of poetry employed by the minstrels, differed only from prose in being more easily retained by the memory ; but when copies were readily and cheaply multiplied by means of the press, the exertion of recollection became unnecessary.
As early as the fifteenth century, numerous prose versions of the most celebrated romances were executed in France and Eng. land, which were printed in the course of the sixteenth. There works are now become extremely rare. Mr Southey attributes this to their great popularity. But if their popularity lasted, as he supposes, till they were worn out by repeated perusal, the printers would have found their advantage in supplying the public with new editions. The truth is, that the editions first published of these expensive folio romances were very small. Abridgments and extracts served the purpose of the vulgar. Meanwhile, the taste of the great took another turn; and the books of chivalry disappeared, in consequence of the neglect and indifference of their owners. More than a century elapsed betwixt their being read for amusement, and sought for as curiosities; and such a lapse of time would render any work scarce, were the editions as numerous as those of the Pilgrim's Progress.
To return to our subject-It appears highly probable to us, that Lobeira's prose Amadis was preceded by a metrical romance, according to the general progress which we observe in the history of fimilar productions.
Another general remark authorises che same conclusion. It is well known that the romances of the middle ages were not anpounced to the hearers as works of mere imagination. On the contrary they were always affirmed by the narrators to be mat. ter of historical fact; nor was this disputed by the fimplicity of the audience. The gallant knights and lovely dames, for whose delight these romances were composed and sung, were neither hocked by the incongruities of the work, nor the marvellous