through 25° of latitude, included within 5 degrees. In short, as we have had occasion to remark, the author of the travels and his geographer have less connexion than an author and an indexmaker; and it is sometimes a subject of surprise that two parts, with so little apparent connexion, should have met. In the best geographical works the maps have been copied from former ones, with all their imperfections on their head; but so vague and erroneous, in general, have been the descriptions, that the defects have passed unobserved. In this system the maps have received a considerable degree of attention, and are executed with great correctness and elegance. We could have wished, indeed, that they had been on a larger scale, and published in a separate atlas; but this might have too much enhanced the price; and, though small, they are clear. The names are by no means crowded; and the most important situations are so distinctly marked, that the less important ones can be easily supplied. Very minute examination might detect a few oversights and imperfections; but the attempt were ungenerous where there is so much to commend; and we can truly say that we have not discovered a single error that will essentially mislead the most inexperienced reader.

The introduction to this system, by Dr. Vince, treats of the subjects usually prefixed to geographical systems-a custom, we should suspect, more honoured in the breach than in the observance; for it is very difficult to perceive the connexion between the solar system, its comets, and the fixed stars, with a description of the earth. The whole of this, however, is executed with great ability, and a precision uncommon in similar introductions. Some parts also of this introduction, peculiarly adapted to the subject, are now, we think, first added; we mean the temperature of different parts of the earth, the divisions of its surface, and its component parts. These truly belong to geography; while the diameters of the planets, and the nature of the tails of comets, have not the smallest relation to it. There is one essential part which is more fully considered than in any other work of this kind; viz. the nature and construction of maps. We know not where to fix a blame; but the whole appears to us too short, and not sufficiently familiar. The different kinds of projections might have been more fully and clearly explained, and the nature of the rhumbs brought more within the reach of common conceptions. In the account of different methods of finding the longitude, Dr. Vince does not, we think, give due credit to the time-piece; and he seems to have overlooked what we consider to be a very essential part of a geographical system-the different currents. The gulf stream, and that which sets eastward on the south of the Cape of Good Hope, are too important to have been passed over in silence. Submarine geography also, as illustrating the theory

of the earth, should not have been omitted. What relates to the variation and dip of the magnetic needle merits particular commendation. The table of longitudes and latitudes is particularly full and correct.

In the preliminary observations to geographical works, the student has been generally disgusted with tedious definitions of islands and continents, capes and bays, isthmuses and straits. These Mr. Pinkerton has slightly passed over, or wholly avoided. In fact, they will be necessarily learnt, in the progress of the study, without trouble. The globe consists of land or water, each encroaching on the other in minute sinuosities or bolder outlines; and the land greatly varies in its shape and extent. To the larger masses of land geographers have uniformly given the name of continents; and to the smaller, of islands; without deciding how many square miles were necessary to establish a title to the more important designation. It has been usually admitted that there are but two continents-the old and the new world; but the extent of New Holland, now generally and properly called Australasia, has raised a doubt in the minds of geographers, whether this may not be styled a continent also. The dispute, however, is an idle one. If we look at a map of the world, and see the two continents stretching almost from the north pole to above the 34th and 55th degrees of south latitude respectively, and compare them with Australasia, scarcely extending to 30° of latitude-when we reflect that this last country is more probably a cluster of islands, which have only been surveyed at a distance-we shall soon see that no difficulty can remain. We long since predicted that New Holland, in its reputed extent, was not a main land; and we were determined in this opinion by the face of the country, the absence of great rivers, and the want of the larger quadrupeds. It can scarcely claim the honour of being alone distinguished as a portion of the globe; for, if Borneo, Java, and Sumatra, be Asiatic islands, New Guinea must be the same, and Australasia must also be included in the same class. Modern geographers have however distinguished the clusters of islands in the South Pacific by the term Polynesia; an example followed by Mr. Pinkerton. But, though these islands are numerous, we see no reason for giving them a conjunctive appellation. If the foundation, however, of a science be now laid for future ages, we would propose this term for the whole cluster to the south and east of the Straits of Malacca, including Australasia. There would be a peculiar propriety in this; as we are convinced, with Gosselin, that the ancient navigators never passed to the eastward of these straits; and New Holland, certainly a vast island, will connect the whole. To this we may add, as an argument of great importance, that the number of these islands is increasing, and the size of those already known gradually augmenting by the same

means to which they owe their origin, viz. the accumulation of coral. Polynesia will then become an important portion of the globe, and perhaps, in time, merit the appellation of a continent, by the aggregation of these numerous islands. If we look at Europe, we shall find that, within the records of history, it was greatly intersected with water; and the kings of the isles, in sacred scripture, mean the European sovereigns.

In the preliminary observations, Mr. Pinkerton glances at the general outlines of the globe, noticing its most striking features in the most natural division of land and water. Europe, as may be expected, first claims his attention; but when we speak of this quarter, or of Asia, the limits are uncertain and disputed. Egypt, for instance, is neither in Asia nor Africa; nor have geographers ever started the question, to which it belongs; and this led us, some time since, to propose the Nile as the limits between these two quarters. In Europe, also, we find, on the east, the same uncertainty; nor is it surprising, since only within these sixty years have we obtained a knowledge of Siberia. The Uralian mountains form a natural boundary for a great extent; and, where this fails, on the north, the river Cara, which falls from these mountains into a gulf of the North Sea, distinguished by its name, supplies the place of the stronger line of division, On the south there is great uncertainty. It appears to us that the eastern limit should be the Ural, which falls from the Uralian mountains into the Caspian Sea. On the south, the Black Sea, the Sea of Azof, with the ideal line proposed by Mr. Pinkerton between the Volga and the Don, due west from Sarepta, where an enlightened and enterprising monarch designed to cut a canal which would unite the Black Sea with the Caspian-in reality, the whole of Europe with a large portion of Asia. Mr. Pinkerton's proposed boundary is farther to the west, along the Kama; but the present division is more suitable to geographical distinction. We know not whether it may be adapted to the political views of the sovereigns of Russia and Persia. The general remarks on the progressive geography of Europe are peculiarly ingenious and just.

The progressive geography of Europe will be more aptly illustrated in the descriptions of each kingdom and state. Suffice it here to observe, that the ablest modern geographers, not excepting D'Anville himself, have greatly erred in their views of the ancient knowledge of Europe. Of Scandinavia the ancients only knew the southern part, as far as the large lakes of Weter and Wener. The Roman ships explored the southern shores of the Baltic as far as the river Rubo, or the western Dwina, and discovered the names of several tribes along the shores: but of the central parts of Germany it is evident, from the maps of Ptolemy, that they had no just ideas; so that the tribes which he enumerates may be more justly assigned to the northern parts along the Baltic, or to the southern on the left of

the Danube. The Carpathian or Sarmatian mountains were well known, but the line of 50° or 52° of north latitude must confine the ancient knowledge in the north east. A singularity in the ancient descriptions has often misled; for as the mountains, in the savage state of Europe, were crowned or accompanied with forests, the same term was used in several barbarous languages to express either; so that the ancients often place important mountains, where the hand of nature had only planted large forests. This remark becomes essential in the comparison of ancient and modern geography. The Riphæan mountains are vainly supposed to have been the Uralian chain, which were to the ancients hid in the profoundest darkness, instead of a large forest running from east to west. The Sevo Mons of Pliny, which he positively assigns to the north of Germany, though geographers, in direct opposition to his text, transfer it to Norway, a region almost as unknown to the ancients as America, must be regarded as a vast forest, extending to some promontory: and the Venedici Montes of Ptolemy are in the like predicament, for modern knowledge evinces that no such mountains exist. Of all sciences, perhaps geography has made the most slow and imperfect progress, and the first restorers of it place at random many grand features of nature, instead of pursuing the recent and just plan, of giving an exact delineation of the country, and afterwards exploring the real extent of ancient knowledge.' Vol. i. p. 8.

A general description of Europe follows; but a minute account of seas, rivers, and mountains, is chiefly, he remarks, to be learnt from maps. As well might history,' he very properly observes, 'be studied by the barren repetition of a hundred names of statesmen and warriors.' But the extent of the article reminds us that we must hasten to a conclusion; and we shall only add our author's plan, reserving our more particular remarks on the conduct and execution of the work to another article.

Under each country the author gives its historical or progressive geography-a part of the subject hitherto imperfectly treated, or omitted, but of the utmost importance, as containing its ancient state, and illustrating ancient authors; secondly, the political state, comprehending what modern authors call statistics; thirdly, the civil geography, including an account of the chief cities, towns, &c.; and, fourthly, the natural geography, which relates to the appearance of the country, its rivers, natural pro→ ductions, &c. Our sentiments of this arrangement need not be repeated: we should reject the second head, or at least render it peculiarly concise. The history is included in the first portion, and is much shorter than in former works; amounting to little more than the title of the section explains-historical epochs.' The manufactures and commerce form a portion of the civil geography.

According to the plan of this work, already explained in the Preface, the various states of Europe will be arranged in three divi

sions, considering them according to their real consequence, as of the first, second, or third order; and each will be treated at a length proportioned to its weight in the political scale, and the consequent interest which it inspires. A small state may indeed sometimes excite a more just curiosity than one of larger dimensions; but such considerations are foreign to an exact system of geography, detailed in a precise order of topics, and extended with impartial views over the whole circle of human affairs. Foreigners may object that too much space is allotted to the British dominions; but the same objection might extend to every system ancient and modern, as the authors have always enlarged the description of the countries in which they wrote. His native country ought also to be the chief subject of every reader; nor can much useful knowledge (for our knowledge chiefly springs from comparison) be instituted concerning foreign regions, till after we have formed an intimate acquaintance with our native land. It will also be understood that, though no point of science be more simple or clear than the arrangement of states, according to their separate orders, at a given period, yet it would be alike idle and presumptuous to decide the precise rank of a state in each order; for instance, whether France or Russia be the most powerful. This part of the arrangement must therefore be elective; and it is sufficient that the states of the same order be treated with a similar length of description.

At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the European states comprized in the first order are: 1. The united kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland: 2. France: 3. Russia: 4. The Austrian dominions: 5. Those of Prussia: 6. Spain: 7. Turkey: which last cannot so justly be reduced to the second order; for though perhaps approaching its fall, still it boasts the name and weight of an empire.

Under the second order have been arranged: 1. Holland, or the United Provinces: 2. Denmark: 3. Sweden: 4. Portugal: 5. Switzerland. In the third are considered the chief states of Germany, that labyrinth of geography, and those of Italy. The kingdoms of Sicily and Sardinia might perhaps, if entire and unshaken, aspire to the second order; and an equal station might be claimed by the junctive Electorate Palatine and Bavarian, and by that of Saxony. But as such states only form rather superior divisions of Germany and Italy, it appeared more adviseable to consider them in their natu ral intimate connexion with these countries.' Vol. i. p. 15.

In this age of novelties, and events the most singular and surprising, the order may be again broken, and kingdoms of the second class advance higher in the list. This arrangement is a political one; and perhaps a better might be discovered, if it were of consequence. Each author prefers his own country, as the most interesting one, for his first object; and where priority is of little importance, this patriotic predilection may be safely indulged.

But though we admit that the order in which the kingdoms were described is of little importance, yet, would the practice of former geographers, would prejudices and customs, allow,