VII. But let us for one moment fuppofe the above octagons placed in the two columns correfponding each to each with thofe of the Milionary (the twenty-three blunders and the two inverfions being corrected); then would the Arabic numbers, and confequently the series of the hexagrams, proceed exactly in the way that was fhewn above in the Millionary's fcheme, as any one may perceive, CONCLUSION. Now it being impoffible that any Chinese fcheme thould partly coincide with that of the Millionary, and partly not (Obf. II), and much less that a Chinese fhould arrange the feries on the fame column partly one way, and partly another (Obf. VI), as in the above fcheme of Dr. Hager's page xx; while, on the other hand, if we were to place his octagons in the fame order as thofe of the Millionary, the feries would regularly proceed the fame in both (Obf. VII); it evidently fo lows, that the tranfpofition of Dr. Hager's octagons is not original, but an artful and malicious one, merely calculated to conceal from the reader his plagiarijm, all the eight octagons being only very awkwardly and very inaccurately copied from the Millionary, notwithftanding his open infinuation of having taken his fcheme from Chinele books. Thus this contemptible abortion of the literary world, only with a view of fhewing his pretended affluence of and familiarity with Chinese authors and books, has impudently prefixed the words above cited to his hexagrams; while, far from hiding his PLAGIARISM from the judicious critic, he has betrayed an equal ignorance in mathematics, as well as in Chinefe literature, by not being aware of the abfurd irregularities that would take place through his SINISTROUS TRANSPOSITION of the octagons. Such is this Learned Doctor! thus ftyled, and huzzaed with repeated acclamations by the Critical Reviewers, who, fuperior to him in nothing elfe than in the coarfenefs of their ignorance, not contented with deceiving the public by bettowing encomiums on their moft abfurd extracts from Dr. Hager's Analyfis, have dared to join their voice in revling Dr. Montueci for taking up the caufe of Chinese literature, and defending it againft fuch a junto as difgrace literature ittelf! Indeed, Dr. Montucci was, perhaps, to VOL. I. blame only for ufing fuch moderate and gentlemanlike language in his attack, while the mean replies from his opponents have plamly fhewn, that even the filthieft vulgarity of Billingstheir jargon. gate would have been too good to fit caft by them upon Dr. Montucci beBut what were the great charges fides their mifreprefentations and abominable falfehoods? They found fault with his having borrowed from modern having quoted his authorities in a title and common European books, and not page! while, if taking accurately and with difcrimination from modern and common European books were a juít caufe of crimination in Chinese literature, Dr. Montucci might have anfwered his opponents, with Juvenal, "Loripedem reclus derideat, Ethiopem albus," fince three fourths of Dr. Hager's Analis are made up with extracts and quotations from the Philofophical Tranfactions, the Mémoires des Millionaires, and the publications by De Guignes, though often mitreprefented, mutilated, and injudicioully felected, as we thall fee, in the fequel. have already feen, and much better one to will fay, that whatever is introduced And as to PLAGIARISM, no in a title page and profpectus withfince it is time enough fo to do in out quotations deferves fuch a name, the courfe of the work: on the other hand, it is plain enough that Dr. Montucci could not have meant make a fecret of the fpecimens introduced in his title page, and that he would have given proper references in p. 5]; for, had he meant to do otherthe courfe of his work [fee his Anfwer, wife, he would never have employed Dr. Hager's wood-engraver, as he plain ly acknowledged in his Answer, p. 6. viewers juftly deferve the charge beBut Dr. Hager and the Critical Reof LITERARY PLAGIARISTS and SERVILE · flowed by the former on Dr. Montucci, caufe of this MOST INFAMOUS page xx, TRANSCRIBERS; the one not only bebut alfo for his having impudently made wretchedly copied and disfigured from his own the elementary characters most Fourmont's Meditationes Sin., as Dr. Montucci hinted in his Anfwer, pp. 5 ing connived at the plagiaritims of the and 8: and the others no lefs for havauthor they reviewed, and even impudently denied them, than fervilely 4 H had the weakness to beftow a Chinese dictionary upon the conceited and arrogant Dr. Hager, who, fuppofing the poffeffion of fuch a volume, without even the fimalleft inclination of ftudying the Chinese language, more than fufficient to perfuade the literati of Europe that he knew what others did not, went from town to town, and from kingdom to kingdom, propagating his Chinefe ignorance, and pafling it off for real knowledge. At lalt, his peregrinations led him amongst us at Berlin; but he could meet with no fuccefs there, fince the fight of a Chinese dictionary could not excite in us the finalleft admiration, accufiomed as we are to the perufal of the invaluable Chinese collection in the Royal Library [fee Mifcell. Berolin., vol. I, p. 87; allo Bayer Muf. Sin., p. 114 of his Gram. Sin.]. Dr. Hager then betook himself to London, and there, indeed, he met with unexampled fuccefs; fince, fortunately for him, the only VERY LEARNLD GENTLEMAN capable of keeping his effrontery in awe, even by his reliding in London, was then ablent. Dr. Hager, profiting by this circumfiance, pub "racters, ALL THE OTHERS con"tained in the Hai-pica, or Su-hai, as "well as the Shuen-thu, or characters "ufual in infcriptions and jeals, or other "forms of Chinese and Japanese characters, may be given for the curious "IN AN APPENDIX.” Now, Mr. Editor, let me first obferve to you, that this PROSPECTUS premifed that the Dictionary itself was to contain about ten thoujund characters with their feveral variations. And then I thall certainly aflonith you, by telling you that to fuch a work an APPENDIX was promifed, which ten engravers, finifhing every day in the year (fup pofed of three hundred working days) ten characters each; being the utmo they could pofiibly do of the antient ones; would have been ten years and four months engraving alone; ! fince it could not contain lefs than three hun dred and nine thoujand fix hundred and eighty-five characters!!! I will make Dr. Høger a prefent of his Dictionary Su-hai; fince even in the Catalogue of Dictionaries prefixed to that entitled Chim-çu-tum [fee Note b, p. 229], and published by Fourment, Gram. Sin., from p. 505 to 511, no fuch a Dictionary Su-hai is mentioned; although no lefs than fir of them have the character hai; but they are called either, Nos. 65, Yen-pien-hai; 66, Pinpien-hai; 67, Lum-pien-hai; 68, Chin pien-hai; 75, Yun-hai-kim;_or, 75, Knei-hai-ça. So, giving Dr. Hager his Dictionary Su-hai in the bargain, I fhall only calculate the number of cha racters promifed in this COMPENDIOUS APPENDIX from what remains of the cited paragraph of his PROSPECTUS. Firft, we are promifed ALL THE CHA RACTERS contained in the Hai-pien. This Dictionary is fortunately well known, and not wanting in the Roya! Library at Berlin. It is neceffary, firft, to premife, that Hai means ocean; and that fuch a character, by the 借假 書六 lifhed in London a PROSPECTUS for a VIth rule At page 159 of the Monthly Magazine, dated March 1, 1800, we read as follows: After the publication of "the most useful and neceffary cha Kia-çic of the Lo-ru [fee my 2d Lett., p. 233] is metaphorically introduced in the titles of thofe dictionaries, whole collections are fo very copious, that they may well be faid, even in our languages, to contain an ocean of cha racters! Such authors are not con tented to exhibit in the modern style Sin, or recent; and, more two hundred and nine thousand feven hundred and feventy characters called Kieu, or obfolete. Dr. Huger's APPENDIX, therefore, would have contained 260,899 characters from the Hai-pien only [fee Fourm. Med. Sin., pp. 124, 125; alfo Gram. Sin., pp. 357 to 359]. 66 Yet we are told that this APPENDIX will contain ALL the above, " as well as the Shuen-fhu, or characters ufual in infcriptions and feals," although with this orthography of the fyllables, Shuen-fhu, either in French, Portuguefe, Spanish, Italian, or English, and much lefs in German, could not, by their found, represent the names of any ftyle of Chinese hand-writing, particularly the fyllable Shuen; yet it is plain that the Doctor alluded to the writing Chuen-ru, or çu. This, indeed, is a tolerably good promife for an APPENDIX; ince, taking it in its literal fenfe, it would imply a difplay of about ten thousand characters in at least thirty-two different ftyles cach, which would make no less than 320,000 characters, if we confined our expec tation only to thofe ftyles exhibited by Kien-hum in his Poem [fee Note f]; while more than the double of them would deferve the very general appel lation of 書篆 pp. 234, 376]. Chuen-xu [fee * Premifing as undeniable, from what has been obferved at p. 377, that between these various ftyles of writing there is a strong analogy, it follows that each component element of the claffical Ko-teu, as most antient, must be reprefented by fome peculiar ftroke or ftrokes in every other hand, which will occur as many times as the fame element is repeated in the various characters. This being well understood, we shall eafily conceive it to be as poffible to write a Chinefe character in thirty-two or feventy different ftyles, as it would be to a profeffor in penmanship to write the fame word in all the different hands he teaches. And why fhould we be aftonished that the Chinefe have contrived to write the same characters which from their peculiar ftructure and metion in thirty-two or more various hands: chanism admit of a wonderful diverfificawhile, notwithstanding the fimplicity and uniformity of our alphabet, we could do nearly as much with any English word? JOHN WILLS, Efq., of Kentish Town, an eminent profeffor of penmanship and mathematics, affures me that the various English hands are no less than fifteen; viz. 1, Old English print; 2, Roman print; 5, Italic print; 4, German text; 5, Court hand; 6, Church text; 7, Engroffing; 8, Set chancery; 9, Running chancery; 10, Large text; 11, Small text; 12, Round hand; 13, Running hand; 14, Italian hand; 15, Short hand. Each of them, the laft only excepted, have two fets of letters very different from each other; namely, the capitals, and the fmall letters; fo that the fame word could be written in at least twentynine different ways, which would prefent to the impartial and judicious inspector even lefs analogy between one another than the characters are no less than 9,353; fo that for this APPENDIX we cannot fet down lefs than eighteen thousand feven hundred and fir characters, being half for the Ta-chuen and half for the Mu-in. As to the Ko-teu and Siao-chuen, there being a pretty good collection of them in that Dictionary, already quoted by me, Chuen-çu-lui [fee p. 284], we fhall know the contents of this part of the APPENDIX by this fimple calculation. This Dictionary is in twelve volumes; and the whole (excluding title, preface, index, and blanks) confifts of above one thousand two hundred pages. None of these pages, upon close examination, contain lefs than firteen antient characters, but a great many twenty, and thirty, and others even forty, which are no fewer than thofe of fixteen. Let us multiply 1200 pages by a mean number of characters 25, and we fhall have no less than thirty thousand antient characters at least for the Ko-teu and Sino-chuen to be expected in this TRIFLING APPENDIX! But we are alio promifed "other "forms of Chinese and Japanefe cha"racters." Well, let us be generous; and let us make him a prefent of thefe, too. Let us only caft up what this APPENDIX was to contain, from the very fair calculation juft now laid before the reader. 1. All the characters of the Dictionary Hai-pien are promifed; fo thefe make exact 260,899 18,706 30,000 - 309,605 Thus, Mr. Editor, this Chinese em piric was trifling with the literati of Great Britain; and by fuch foolish promites found friends and admirers. I cannot compare Dr. Huger to any one better than to that fimple woodman in Moliere, who was forced to turn phyfician by dint of fevere thrashings; and, to appear as fuch, he uttered a fort of gibberish, which he was far from underftanding himself: juft as Dr. Hager ftuffed his PROPOSALS with ftrange mo nofyllables, while he alluded to Chinele books or characters, without being able to conceive what was meant by them; well affured, as the woodman thought of thofe who heard him, that thole who read his PROSPECTUS would But not undertand it any better, there is this great difference,--that the poor woodman was forced fo to do; and that Dr. Hager wilfully and spontaneously attempted to impose upon the public with his fludied Donfente; and while he alone deferved for it the fame application as the woodman innocently bore, he mer, on the cou trary, with the Critical Reviewers, who, affociating their ignorance and impudence with thofe of the Doctor, flood forth as his panegyrifts, and joined all together in laying fnares to the uncautious admirers of the Chinese language, But how could fo many be fo eanly deceived? Was it only on account of the fhow of a Chinese Dictionary? No. Mr. Editor, I will tell you the great qualification of Dr. Hager betides:he had detected the literary impofition of the Abate Vella concerning au Arabic MS.; and, becaufe he knew Arabic, he was an Orientalist; and b caute he was an Orientalift, he knew all the languages of the Eaft, and particularly the Chinefe! But, in the name of reafon and fenfe, what have the pothooks and hangers of all the fantaft.cal, alphabetical, and polyfyllabical languages of the known world to do with the Chinefe, the only one that is truly philofophical, hieroglyphical, and monofyllabica!? not fo as to amount to one hundred for the fame character, as Dr. Hager most ignorantly afferts at p. 1, moft fiupidly jumbling together the antient and modern characters, as well as the various forms and ftyles of them. [See Note .] Hoom-ti" add about 500 years atter Fo-hi." For the Univerfal Magazine. TWO INTERESTING MEMOIRS RE- MALMIGNATI; AS REFERRED distinct governments, each poffeffing their government or manor-houfe, and independent of one another." "And" (ibid, p. 178)" that the TO AT PP. 350 AND 351 (VOL. interior adminiftration of Rovigo, I) OF THE UNIVERSAL MAGA- [Concluded from page 471.] “The district of Lendinara," he obferves, "is fituated between thofe of Rovigo and Badia, and comprifes the nine villages between the Adiget and the Adige. It is governed by a noble Venetian who has the title of Podefta. The produce of this diftrict confifts principally in flax and grain. We must not confound it with a Lendinara, which is a little walled city, and fituated on the banks' of the Adiget. It contains two parishes, nine churches, a convent of nuns, with others of regular orders, and various chapels and hofpitals. There are alfo public schools for the inftruction of youth, and a Mont-depiété for the relief of the poor. The council of this city confifts of forty citizens, who enjoy the fame privileges as the counsellors of Rovigo, and are guided by the fame ftatutes as the reft of the Poléfin of Rovigo." He had previoufly obferved, at p. 172, "that the Poléfin is divided into two parts, namely, the Poléfin of Rovigo and that of Adria, which forins two fince that city fell to the dominion of the Venetians, has been confided to the management of the grand council, confifting of fixty-two citizens, who diftribute the fubaltern offices, fuch as infpectors of provifions, of the roads, bridges, causeways, &c." And at page 181 he obferves, "that the council of the little city called Badia confifts only of twenty-four citizens, who have the fame honours and prerogatives as thofe of Lendinara and Rovigo, and who are guided likewife by the general ftatutes of the Poléfin." The title of a difcourfe by Malmignati informs us that the commune of Lendinara affumed the appellation of Magnifique, and that they fent deputies and orators to the doges of Venice, to congratulate them on their nomination: Orazione di Bartholomeo Malmignati, oratore della Magn. comunità di Lendinara, nella congratu lazione del ferenifs. Principe di Venezia, Marcantonio Trevifano. Venezia pel Griffio, 1554. 8vo. La Martinière fays that it is a country town, containing about four thousand inhabitants, though the air is rather denfe in fummer. According to M. Jagemann (p. 180), it is a rich commercial city, where they held confiderable markets every week, and a fair every year. It is about two centuries, continues he (ut fupra), fince they established an academy, which still flourishes, and is denominated de' Compoli. There were also, at Lendinara, two other academies unnoticed by M. Jagemann, but refpecting which Quadrio gives us the most ample information. They have, all three, names as eccentric as almost five hundred other Italian academies. It is vain that Lelio Riccoboni of Modena, one of the first Italian actors, author of the Hiflory of the Italian Theatre and many Italian comedies, has endeavoured (p. 125 of the |