was transported from those islands to Massilia. The most probable supposition is, that Greece and Italy were exclusively supplied with amber by an overland trade, across Central Europe, from the shores of the Baltic to the head of the Adriatic; and that the Britannic tin was for the most part carried across Gaul to Massilia. Before about the year 700 B.C., the entire carrying trade of the Mediterranean seems to have been in the hands of the Tyrians; and they had, at periods antecedent to authentic history, established colonies at Carthage, Utica, and Gades. The northern coast of Africa was, to a great extent, Phoenician; the coasting voyage from the Nile to the Pillars of Hercules, (which Scylax reckons at seventy-four days,) could therefore be safely performed by a Tyrian merchant vessel. In this manner Tyre was able to carry on a regular trade with Gades and the wealthy Tartessus, the favored region upon the Bætis; but neither the Phoenicians nor the Carthaginians appear to have advanced their permanent settlements far to the west of Gades; and if their trade to the north did not extend further than their trade to the south, along the western shore of Africa, so far was it from reaching the amber coast of the Baltic, or the tin mines of Cornwall, that it could scarcely have ascended as high as the mouth of the Tagus. The traces of Phoenician establishments on the southern coast of Spain have been carefully collected and investigated by Movers, in his learned work on the Phoenicians: they extend along the whole of the ancient Bætica, from Murgis to the river Anas or Guadiana: but although Ulysippo, the modern Lisbon, fabled to be the foundation of Ulysses, is conjectured by Movers, on etymological grounds, to have been a Phoenician name, there is no clear historical record of the existence of any Phoenician factory on the western or Lusitanian face of the peninsula. asserted, that the views of those who, like Heeren, maintain that the Carthaginians sailed to the Prussian coast for amber, and even hint at their having reached America, are opposed both to evidence and probability. By the expedition of Cæsar the Romans were made acquainted with the northern shores of Gaul, and with Britain, situated at the extremity of the world.* It was Cæsar's boast that he had been not only the invader, but the discoverer, of this remote island. The German ocean was first navigated by Drusus, in 12 B.C.; and in A.D. 4, Tiberius sent a flotilla down the Rhine, with orders to follow the coast eastwards and to sail up the mouth of the Elbe, an operation which was accomplished with success. These waters were, however, considered so distant from the Roman world, that Pedo Albinovanus, a contemporary poet, could represent one of the companions of Drusus as describing the terrors of the voyage in the following terms: But although Roman discovery at this period advanced as far as the Elbe, it advanced no farther. "Every thing," says Strabo, "beyond the Elbe is unknown;" 66 and," he adds, in the belief of a continnous northern sea, "no one has navigated along the coast as far as the mouths of the Caspian." At the time of this geographer, however, the Romans had heard of the peninsula of Jutland, which they called the Cimbric Chersonese; and by the time of Pliny they had become ac quainted with the Vistula. We learn, indeed, from the same writer, that, during The enterprise of the Carthaginians, in the reign of Nero, a Roman knight was the way both of colonization and discov-employed to buy amber in the north of ery, seems to have been directed rather along the African than along the European shore of the Atlantic. There were many Carthaginian settlements on the western coast of Africa, beginning with Tingis, the modern Tangier; and the Punic mariners had, probably before 300 B.C., become acquainted with some of the Canary Islands. It may, however, be confidently Germany; that he reached the northern coast-which must have been the southern coast of the Baltic-by way of Carnuntum, a town on the Danube between the modern Vienna and Presburg, and * Virgil (En. viii. 727) speaks of "extremi hominum Morini." The Morini inhabited Northern Gaul, the country where Calais and Boulogne now stand. that he returned to Rome with a large supply of the article which he was commissioned to purchase. At this period the Romans likewise heard of the existence of the Scandinavian peninsula; but they conceived it to be a collection of large islands, and not a peninsula; so that by this hypothesis (which seems to have retained its currency for a long time, since even Jornandes, who lived in the sixth century, mentions the island of Scanzia) they were able to reconcile the existence of land in this direction with an open sea reaching to the north of the Caspian. In this imperfect state of geographical knowledge respecting Central and Northern Europe, it is not likely that the Greeks should have possessed any distinct ideas respecting the population of the countries beyond the Danube and the Alps. The news of the capture of Rome by the Gauls in the year 390 B.C., reached Athens in the form of a story that an army of Hyperboreans had taken a Hellenic city named Rome, situated near the Great Sea. All that Herodotus seems to know of the Celts is, that they dwell near the sources of the Danube, that their country is beyond the Pillars of Hercules, and that they lie furthest to the west, with the exception of the Cynetes. Strabo states that Timosthenes and Eratosthenes, both writers on geography about 280-200 B.C., and their predecessors, were without positive information respecting Iberia and Celtica, and still more concerning Germany and Britain. Indeed (he adds) their knowledge of Italy, the Adri atic, the Black Sea, and the regions immediately to the north, was extremely imperfect. The prevailing opinion among the Greeks, until the campaigns of Cæsar had opened Central Europe, was, that the whole region west of Scythia was inhabited by a Celtic population; and it was comprised under the general appellation of Celtica. Celts; 2, that the Kymri and the Gaels are not Celts. And he denies the truth of the received propositions- 1, that the Germans are not Celts; 2, that the Kymri and the Gaels are Celts. He shows that the writers who treated this subject after the revival of letters, maintained the national identity of the ancient Celts and Germans, and that the now received opinion was first promulgated by Dom Bouquet in 1738. It was adopted by many writers in the last century, but its universal acceptance was (according to Dr. Holtzmann) owing to the passions excited by the wars of the French Revolution and Empire. At that period of mutual aversion, both parties were glad to affirm that Germans and Gauls had always been distinct nations. The finely organized Gallic nation (it was said by the French) had nothing in common with the rough northern barbarians, who first under Ariovistus, afterwards under the Vandal king, Crocus, Chlodio the Frank and others, and, lastly, under Blücher, had devastated the plains of France. On the other hand, the Germans appealed to the description of the people in the Germania of Tacitus, and dwelt on the passages of the ancients which spoke of the instability, the frivolity, and the vices of the Gauls. Hence both nations, Dr. Holtzmann thinks, rejoiced in repudiating all community of language and affinity of blood, and gladly adopted the historical theory which coïncided with their feelings of animosity. With regard to the Gaels and the Welsh, their national vanity was gratified by a system which represented them as the primitive people of Western Europe, and found in their language etymologies of ancient Gallic words. Dr. Holtzmann considers it as certain that the British races (under which name he includes the Kymri of Wales and Brittany, and the Gaels of Ireland and Scotland) and the Germans are of different national origins. Hence, as he truly says, it fol lows that if the Germans are Čelts, the British races are not Celts. The vague and fluctuating language of the ancients respecting the ethnographical relations of Central and Northern Europe, Dr. Holtzmann begins by laying it has induced Dr. Holtzmann to question down that all Central Europe was inhabthe received opinion as to the Gauls, Ger-ited by Celtic tribes, such as the Cimbri mans, and Britons, and to propound, in the treatise named at the head of this article, the theory which we now proceed to state. The two propositions which he seeks to establish, are-1, that the Germans are and the Teutones, who are expressly called Celts by the ancient writers; and that the belief in large immigrations of Germans from Scandinavia is groundless. He maintains that Scandinavia was a barren and nearly uninhabited country, and that its reputation of being a cradle of nations is fabulous. Hence he draws the conclusion that if Central Europe was occupied by Celtic tribes, and Scandinavia was nearly uninhabited, no space is left where the Germans could have resided. He next proceeds to collect the testimonies of the ancients, which support the identity of the Germans and the Celts; but these, when correctly interpreted, are in fact mere adoptions and repetitions of the old vague phraseology by which all Central Europe west of Scythia was assigned to the Celts and was called Celtica. With regard to the Britons, he shows that their affinity with the Gauls is first affirmed by Tacitus in the Agricola; but his attempt to weaken this testimony is not successful. He seeks further to support his views by adducing those statements of the ancients by which similar physical characteristics (such as light hair, blue eyes, and hight of body) are attributed to both Celts and Germans, and by pointing out the rude and barbarous state of the Britons, as compared with the more civilized manners of the Gauls. The explanation of Tacitus, that "Britanni manent, quales Galli fuerunt," is rejected by him as contrary to probability. The passages respecting the resemblance of the Gallic and British religions, cause Dr. Holtzmann greater difficulty. The presence of Druids in the island of Mona, (Anglesey,) when it was invaded by the Romans in 61 A.D., is distinctly attested by Tacitus in the 14th book of the Annale; but this testimony he removes by a conjectural alteration of the text. Having cleared away this obstacle, he denies the existence of Druids in Britain. The positive testimony of Cæsar that the Druidical discipline was invented in Britain, and introduced from that country into Gaul, and that those who wish to make themselves perfect masters the system, generally repair to Britain in order to learn it, is again set aside by substituting Germania for Britannia. The resort to such extreme measures in support of a historical theory, must be regarded as presumptive evidence that its state is desperate.* Dr. Holtzmann concludes his proofs by an investigation of the words preserved from the ancient Celtic tongue, which he identifies with words in the Teutonic languages, and not with Gaelic, Welsh, or Breton forms. The arguments and conclusions of Dr. Holtzmann are examined and confuted by Dr. Brandes, in the essay whose title we have prefixed to this article. We consider the system of the former as unsound. Whatever may be the inconsistency or obscurity in the language used by the ancients, we can not but think that Cæsar and Tacitus regarded the Gauls and the Germans as forming distinct races, and that both considered the Britons as allied to their Gallic neighbors. Nevertheless, the boldness of his assertions attracts at tention, and he will render an useful service to history if, by putting the advocates of the received opinion upon their defense, he causes the evidence respecting the ethnological relations of the Germans, Gauls, and Britons to be examined more critically than heretofore. We ought, in conclusion, to remind our readers that the critical investigation of the modern Celtic languages was originated by our countryman, Dr. Prichard, twenty-five years ago, whose treatise on the subject, with the addition of a large store of illustrative notes, has recently been republished under the competent editorship of Dr. Latham. *Mr. C. Merivale, in his recently published volume (vol vi.) of the History of the Romans under the Empire, devotes a chapter to the reduction of Britain by Claudius, and the subsequent ope rations of the Roman officers. In connection with this subject, he mentions the proscription of Druidism in Gaul by this Emperor (Suet. Claud. 25.;) he gions, and considers British Druidism to have been recognizes the affinity of the Gallic and British reliextirpated by Suetonius Paullinus, iu 61 B.C. From Colburn's New Monthly Magazine. MADAME DE MONTMORENCY.* Her MADEMOISELLE DE MONTPENSIER relates in her Memoirs, that the court having rested awhile at Moulins, when on a journey, the King, Louis XIV., Anne of Austria, and the princes, went to the Convent of the Visitation to see a nun, their relative, who had immured her self in that place, and who had suffered so cruelly that she had no wish remaining but to die. This nun was the widow of Marshal Duke of Montmorency, whom Richelieu had beheaded at Toulouse. An Italian by birth, she was born in Rome in Rome in 1600, a descendant of that great house of Orsini which gave so many saints, pontiffs, and cardinals to the Church. Niece on her mother's side to Pope SixteQuint, she was brought up at Florence, for she also belonged, on the side of her grandmother, to the Medici. The Duke of Bracciano, her father, had distinguished himself in the maritime wars of Tuscany against the Turks and the corsairs, and having retired to Rome, he had wedded there a niece of the Pope, who had by him ten children, seven sons and three daughters. The Grand-Duchess of Tuscany took charge of the education of the latter, and Mary, the youngest of the three, accompanied her sisters at Florence. Mary of Medicis was on the point of leav-dans ma niece des Ursins!'" ing for France at the very epoch of her birth, and, wishing to be her godmother, she gave to her her name. In after times, her eldest sister having married the Duke of Gaustalla, and her second sister Prince Borghese, Mary of Medicis felt desirous of establishing her namesake, the youngest, in France, and she asked her hand for Henry of Montmorency. her as a mother would have done. introduction to De Montmorency was characteristic of the times. When the latter entered into the Queen's apartment, Louis XIII. took the princess by the hand, and presented her to him, saying: Here is my cousin, the illustrious Italian; is she not worthy of you-are you not pleased with her ?" The courtly De Montmorency did all in his power to show that he was sensible of the merits of the lady who was presented to him. Mary, who was of a very loving disposition, took greatly to heart being separated from her relatives and the friends of her youth, but Mary of Medicis did all in her power to assuage her grief-gave her a home in the Louvre, and acted towards * Madame de Montmorency: Maurs et Caractères au XVII Siècle. Par AMÉDÉE RENÉE. M. Amédée Renée) Marie des Ursins (Orisini) "Without being strikingly beautiful (says had the seductions of youth, a fair skin, a rare shape, and the still more powerful charms of a superior nature. Her eyes, of Roman beauty, expressed in their depths reflection and love. Her bearing and her manners alike attested modesty as well as nobility. Brought up in a convent at Florence, she found herself at fourteen years of age thrown into the midst of a intrigues of a most dissipated court: yet did world to which she was a stranger, and the she so conduct herself as to avoid all its shoals. The queen, her aunt, who was not so fortunate, at least knew how to appreciate those merits in her niece, of which she could not set her the example; nay, she was even proud of the credit reflected by her on her family, and she plumed de vertus j'aime à la fois,' she used to say: herself on the perfections of her relative. 'Que This amiable and virtuous young princess loved her husband, her marriage with whom had been celebrated at the Louvre by festivals at which almost all the nobility of the country were present, with deep affection "d'un inconceivable armor," as M. Renée has it. A prelate of austere piety, who knew her well, has left on record "that she loved M. de Montmorency with all the love that one can have in this world, for she never loved another but him. This excessive love was the only thing that could be reproached (le seul désordre) in the life of Madame de Montmorency, for it can not be denied that this great love of the creature was not an obstacle to internal worship." Poor erring thing! if she sinned in her chastity | put up with it; but cost what it might, he was and her constancy to her chivalrous husband, what would she have done had she imitated other courtly ladies, beginning at the Queen herself? "The object of such devotion appeared to justify it; to a brilliant exterior, known bravery, and a chivalrous heart, the Duke of Montmorency added the most distinguished qualities; all his sentiments were allied to grandeur. He still further distinguished himself by a mind more cultivated than that of his peers. The constable, his father, who could not read, and signed his name with difficulty, had made a resolution that his heir should be able to read his own dispatches, and even, in case of necessity, to write them, so that he paid unusual attention to his education; add to this, Henri IV. had his eyes upon the child whom he loved, and whom he had made his godson. He had given him his name, and called him his son. See,' he said one day to his minister Villeroy-' see my son Montmorency, how handsome he is! If ever the house of Bourbon should fail, there is no family in Europe that would deserve the crown of France so much as his.'"* The precedents of the Duke of Montmorency were not, however, precisely so favorable to matrimonial felicity as might have been hoped for. He could, it would appear, throw off a lady, when it so suited his purposes, with an indifference but too characteristic of the times he lived in. "Henri IV. wished to marry his godson to one of his natural daughters, but the parents could not agree in the choice: the constable wished for Mademoiselle de Vendôme; the King had promised her to the house of Longueville, and he offered in exchange to the Montmorencys Mademoiselle de Verneuil. The old Duke, very obstinate in all matters, would not consent to this compromise; Henri IV., who had the affair at heart, exiled his compère, as he designated the constable, to Chantilly, and kept the youth under his hand. But the obstinate father played him a trick: he secretly negotiated the marriage of his son with an heiress of Brittany, Mademoiselle de Chemillé; and the matter once concluded, young Montmorency was carried away from the Louvre, and flying with his uncle D'Amville, they made such expedition as not to be overtaken. The King wrote to PlessyMornay, governor of Saumur, to arrest them on their passage, but they managed to escape his vigilance. M. de Soubise, dispatched with two companies of light horse to carry off the young lady, met with no better success. "The marriage was carried into effect, and it is said consummated,' when M. de Soubise arrived. It seemed that there only remained to the King to *Histoire de la Maison de Montmorency. Par DESORMEAUX. T. iii. p. 191. VOL. XLV.-NO. II. determined to have his dear Montmorency for a son-in-law. He offered then to his compère same time, to indemnify the Longuevilles; and Mademoiselle de Vendôme, proposing, at the thus the matter was arranged. Whether the marriage had been consummated or not, the King had it broken under pretext that his godson was not nubile. He was, indeed, only fifteen years of age, but any one would have given him twenty; and the adventure caused many a smile 'at court.' No sooner one marriage over and broken, than Montmorency, affianced to Mademoiselle de Vendôme, was about to taste of the pleasures of a second marriage, when the King's death upset the project. It was then that the Queen-regent, desiring for herself an alliance with the same powerful house, married him unreluctantly to her niece, Mary Orsini. upon Mademoiselle de Chemillé had in the mean time wedded the Duke of Retz, and the marriage of Madame de Montmorency was interrupted by a serious incident, for Montmorency having permitted himself to remark Mademoiselle de Chemillé in presence of his former relations with the Duke of Retz in a manner that was any thing but worthy of his gallant and chivalrous character, the Duke called him out, and they fought at the Porte SaintAntoine, De Montmorency, according to one authority, (Desormeaux,) disarming his antagonist, but according to another, he was himself disarmed. A new career was opened for the young Duke, now that he was at last really married. He was sent to take possession of the government of Languedoc, and to visit the different towns of that great province. The Duchess wished to withdraw during his absence to Chantilly, but the Queen would not let her leave the court. The separation lasted for a year, and was the first of Mary's life of incessant çares and anxieties. She, indeed, took her young husband's absence so much to heart, that both the King Louis XIII. and the Queen were affected by it. have only the half of Madame de Montmorency with us," the latter used to observe; "her body is with us, but her mind is in Languedoc." The King himself, thoughtful and silent, used to hide himself in the recess of a window in order to watch his melancholy cousin. Mary "We Vie de Madame de Montmorency. Par J. C. GARREAU. T. i. p. 47. 14 |