rtment of study is very perceptible in the
several histories we possess of Greece. Mitford, notwithstanding his
acknowledged imperfections and demerits, has had the tribute of applause
paid to him, and deservedly, of having been the first to break through
that icy timidity with which the moderns were wont to write the annals
of ancient Greece. They seemed to be afraid of applying the knowledge
which time and science had brought them, to the events and writings of a
classical age and country, lest this should imply the presumption that
they were wiser than the ancients. They sat down to their task like
young scholars who are _construing_, not interpreting, their author.
Little discrimination was made between the learned writings before them.
If it was not, as it has been wittily observed, "all Greek, and
therefore all true," at least every thing that was Greek had a
mysterious air of learning which protected it from profane examination;
and incongruities and futilities, absurdities of reasoning, and
improbabilities of narrative, were veiled or half concealed under the
charm of Grecian typography. Mitford set aside this too great reverence
for the ancient literati. As he saw men, and not moving statues, in the
heroes of Grecian history, so he was persuaded that the writers of that
history were also men, fallible and prejudiced, like those who were
living and writing about him. But Mitford overcame one set of prejudices
by the force which prejudices of another kind had endowed him with. He
saw how party spirit had raged in modern as well as ancient times, but
he detected it with that proverbial readiness with which the thief
detects the thief; he wrote himself with the energy and penetration, the
want of candour and generosity, which at all times will distinguish the
advocate. Moreover, the scholarship of Europe has since his time assumed
so lofty a port, and taken such rapid strides, that on many subjects he
has been left lagging in the rear.

The history of Greece by Dr Thirlwall is a great improvement on its
predecessor. It is written with profounder learning, and a more
equitable spirit; and is indeed pre-eminently distinguished by the
calmness, candour, and judge-like serenity that pervades it. In a style
always lucid in disquisition, and always elegant in narrative, he
appears to be solely anxious to communicate the fair result, whatever it
may be, to which his extensive reading has conducted him. But,
unfortunately,