and capacity of exertion equal to that of his best days. He began the winter pleased with himself on account of the completion of this work; and his friends were flattered with the hope that he might live to enjoy the accession of emolument and fame which he expected it would bring. But the seeds of a mortal disease were lurking unperceived within him. On the 24th of December, 1800, he complained of a pain in his bowels, which, during

"DU

URING the time that the History of Scotland was in the press, Dr. Robertson removed with his family from Gladsmuir to Edinburgh, in consequence of a presentation which he had received to one of the churches of that city. His preferments now multiplied rapidly. In 1759, he was appointed chaplain of Stirling Castle; in 1761, one of his majesty's chaplains in ordinary for Scotland; and, in 1762, he was chosen principal of this university. Two years after wards, the office of king's historiographer for Scotland (with a salary of two hundred pounds a-year) was revived in his favour.

"The revenue arising from these different appointments, though far exceeding what had ever been enjoyed before by any presbyterian clergyman in Scotland, did not satisfy the zeal of some of Dr. Robertson's admirers, who, mortified at the narrow field which this part of the island afforded to his ambi

tion, wished to open to it the career of the English church. References to such a project occur in letters addressed to him about this time by sir Gilbert Elliot, Mr. Hume, and Dr. John Blair. What answer he returned to them I have not been able to learn; but, as the subject is mentioned once only by each of these gentlemen, it is presumable that his disapprobation was expressed in those decided terms which became the consistency and dignity of his character."

"Dr. Robertson's own ambition was, in the mean time, directed to a different object. Soon after the publication of his Scottish history, we find him consulting his friends about the choice of another historical subject; anxious to add new laurels to those he had already acquired. Dr. John Blair urged him strongly on this occasion to write a

complete history of England; and mentioned to him, as an inducement, a conversation between

lord

lord Chesterfield and colonel Ir win, in which the former said that he would not scruple, if Dr. Robertson would undertake such a work, to move, in the house of peers, that he should have public encouragement to enable him to carry it into execution. But this proposal he was prevented from listening to by his unwillingness to interfere with Mr. Hume; although it coincided with a favourite plan which he himself had formed at a very early period of his life. The two subjects which appear to have chiefly divided his choice were, the History of Greece, and that of the emperor Charles the Fifth. Between these he he sitated long, balancing their comparative advantages and disad vantages, and availing himself of all the lights that his correspondents could impart to him. Mr. Walpole and Mr. Hume took a more peculiar interest in his deliberations, and discussed the subject with him at length in various letters. I shall extract a few passages from these. The opinions of such writers upon such a question cannot fail to be generally interesting; and some of the hints they suggest may perhaps be useful to those who, conscious of their own powers, are disposed to regret that the field of historical composition is exhausted.

"The following passages are copied from a letter of Mr. Walpole, dated 4th March, 1759.

If I can throw in any additional temptation to your disposition for writing, it is worth my while even at the hazard of my judgment and my knowledge, both of which however are small enough to make me tender of them. Before I read your History, I should probably have been glad to dictate to

you, and (I will venture to say itit satirises nobody but myself) should have thought I did honour to an obscure Scotch clergyman, by directing his studies with my superior lights and abilities. How you have saved me, sir, from making a ridiculous figure, by making so great an one yourself! But could I suspect that a man I believe much younger, and whose dialect I scarce understood, and who came to me with all the diffidence and modesty of a very middling author, and who I was told had passed his life in a small living near Edinburghcould I suspect that he had not only written what all the world now allows the best modern history, but that he had written it in the purest English, and with as much seeming knowledge of men and courts as if he had passed all his life in important embassies? In short, sir, I have not power to make you, what you ought to be, a minister of state; but I will do all I can; I will stimulate you to continue, writing, and I shall do it without presumption.

I should like either of the subjects you mention, and I can figure one or two others that would shine in your hands. In one light the history of Greece seems preferable. You know all the materials for it that can possibly be had. It is concluded; it is clear of all objections; for perhaps nobody but I should run wildly into passionate fondness for liberty, if I was writing about Greece. It even might, I think, be made agreeably new, and that by comparing the extreme difference of their manners and ours, particularly in the article of finances, a system almost new in the world.

With regard to the History of Charles V. it is a magnificent sub

ject,

some: I tell you, that you may not trust me too much. Mr. Gray, a very perfect judge, has sometimes censured me for parliamentary phrases, familiar to me as your Scotch law is to you. I might plead for my inaccuracies, that the greatest part of my book was written with people talking in the room; but that is no excuse to myself, who intended it for correct. However, it is easier to remark inaccuracies in the work of another than in one's own; and, since you command me, I will go again over your second volume with an eye to the slips, a light in which I certainly did not intend my second examination of it.'

it

"In transcribing some of these paragraphs, as well as in the other extracts I have borrowed from Mr. Walpole's letters, I must acknowledge that I have been less influenced by my own private judgment than by my deference for the partiality which the public has long entertained for this popular and fashionable writer. Of the literary talents of an author on whom so much flattery has been lavished, does not become me to speak disrespectfully; nor would I be understood to detract from his merits in his own peculiar and very limited walk of historical disquisition: but I should be wanting to myself if I were not to avow that, in the foregoing quotation, my object was rather to gratify the curiosity of others than to record a testimony which I consider as of any importance to Dr. Robertson's fame. The value of praise, besides, whatever be the abilities of him who bestows it, depends on the opinion we entertain of his candour and sincerity qualities which it will be diflicult to allow to Mr. Wal

pole, after comparing the various passages quoted in this memoir with the sentiments he expresses on the same subject in his posthumous publication.

"For the length of the following extract from a letter of Mr. Hume's no such apology is necessary. The matter is valuable in itself; and the objections stated to the age of Charles V, as a subject for history, form the highest possible panegy ric on the abilities of the writer by whom the difficulties which appeared so formidable to Mr. Hume were so successfully surmounted."

I have frequently thought and talked with our common friends upon the subject of your letter. There always occurred to us seve ral difficulties with regard to every subject we could propose. The Ancient Greek history has several recommendations, particularly the good authors from which it must be drawn: but this same circumstance becomes an objection when more narrowly considered: for what can you do in most places with these authors but transcribe and translate them? No letters or state-papers from which you could correct their errors, or authenticate their narration, or supply their defects. Be sides Rollin is so well wrote with respect to style, that with superficial people it passes for sufficient. There is one Dr, Leland, who has lately wrote the life of Philip of Macedon, which is one of the best periods. The book, they tell me, is perfectly well wrote; yet it has had such small sale, and has so little excited the attention of the public, that the author has reason to think his labour thrown away. I have not read the book; but hy the size I should judge it to be too particular. It is a pretty large

quarto,

quarto. I think a book of that size suflicient for the whole history of Greece till the death of Philip: and I doubt not but such a work would be successful, notwithstanding all these discouraging circumstances. The subject is noble, and Rollin is by no means equal to it.

، I own I like still less your project of the Age of Charles the Fifth. That subject is disjointed; and your hero, who is the sole connexion, is not very interesting. A competent knowledge at least is required of the state and constitution of the empire; of the several kingdoms of Spain, of Italy, of the Low Countries; which it would be the work of half a life to acquire: and, though some parts of the story may be entertaining, there would be many dry and barren; and the whole seems not to have any great

.charms.

But I would not willingly start objections to these schemes, unless I had something to propose which would be plausible; and I shall mention to you an idea which has sometimes pleased me, and which I had once entertained thoughts of attempting. You may observe that among modern readers Plutarch is in every translation the chief favourite of the ancients. Numberless translations, and numberless editions, have been made of him in all languages; and no translation has been so ill done as not to be successful. Though those who read the originals never put him in comparison either with Thucydides or Xenoplion, he always atraches more the reader in the translation a proof that the idea and execution of his work is, in the main, happy. Now, I would have you think of writing modern lives sonewhat after that manner: not to enter into a detail of the actions,

but to mark the manners of the great personages, by domestic stories, by remarkable sayings, and by a general sketch of their lives and adventures. You see that in Plutarch the life of Cæsar may be read in half an hour. Were you to write the life of Henry the Fourth of France after that model, you might pillage all the pretty stories in Sully, and speak more of his mistresses than of his battles. In short, you might gather the flower of all modern history in this manner: the remarkable popes, the kings of Sweden, the great discoverers and conquerers of the New World; even the eminen tuen of letters might furnish you with matter, and the quick dispatch of every different work would encourage you to begin a new one. volume were successful, you might compose another at your leisure, and the field is inexhaustible. There are persons whom you might meet with in the corners of history, so to speak, who would be a subject of entertainment quite unexpected; and as long as you live you might give and receive amusement by such a work. Even your son, if he had a talent for history, would sueceed to the subject, and his son to him. I shall insist no further on this idea; because, if it strikes your fancy, you will easily perceive all its advantages, and, by further thought, all its difficulties."

If one

"After much deliberation, Dr. Robertson resolved to undertake the History of Charles V.a determination not less fortunate for the public than for his own fame, as it engaged him, unexpectedly perhaps, in a train of researches not confined to the period, or to the quarter of the globe that he had originally tin view; but which opening, as he advanced, new and

more