POWER, with his head exalted to the skies,
His spear a sun-beam, and his shield a star,
Round, like two flaming meteors, rolls his eyes,
Stamps with his iron foot, and sounds to war:
She sits upon a rock,

She bends before his spear;
She rises from the shock,

Wielding her own in air.

Hard as the thunder doth she drive it on,
And, closely mantled, guides it to his crown,
His long sharp spear, his spreading shield, is gone ;
He falls, and, falling, rolleth thousands down."

Every reader must be struck with the modern character of these extracts, nor can he fail to have noticed the lyrical measure, so eminently felicitous, with which the preceding ode commences; together with the bold image of Freedom triumphing over Power. If the merits of the Rowleian Controversy rested solely on this one piece, it would be decisive, for no man, in the least degree familiar with our earlier metrical compositions, (and especially if he were a poet,) could hesitate a moment in assigning this chorus to a recent period.

It is impossible not to believe that the whole of Rowley was written at first in modern English, and then the orthographical metamorphose commenced; and to one who had prepared himself, like Chatterton, with a dictionary, alternately modern and old, and old and modern, the task of transformation was not difficult, even to an ordinary mind. It should be remembered, also, that Chatterton furnished a complete glossary to the whole of Rowley. Had he assumed ignorance, it might have checked, without removing, suspicion, but, at present, it appears inexplicable, that our sage predecessors should not have been convinced that one who

could write, in his own person, with such superiority as Chatterton indisputably did, would be quite competent to give words to another, the meaning of which he so well understood himself.

. But the thought will naturally arise, what could have prompted Chatterton, endued, as he was, with so much original talent, to renounce his own personal aggrandizement, and to transfer the credit of his opulence to another. It is admitted to be an improvident expenditure of reputation, but no inference advantageous to Rowley can be deduced from this circumstance. The eccentricities, and aberrations of genius, have rarely been restricted by line and plummet, and the present is a memorable example of perverted talent; but all this may be conceded, without shaking the argument bere contended for.

There is a process in all our pursuits, and the nice inspector of associations can almost uniformly trace his predilections to some definite cause. This, doubtless, was the case with Chatterton. He found old parchments early in life. In the first instance, it became an object of ambition to decipher the obscure. One difficulty surmounted, strengthened the capacity for conquering others: perseverance gave facility, till at length his vigorous attention was effectually directed to what he called "antique lore:" and this confirmed bias of his mind, connected, as it was, with his inveterate proneness to impose on others, and supported by talents which have scarcely been equalled, reduces the magnified wonder of Rowley, to a plain, comprehensible question.

There was, and, perhaps, may still be, another class of objectors, with whom the grand reason for maintaining the genuineness of these poems, is, the difficulty of conceiving it practicable that compositions, like those

of Rowley, invested with so splendid an array of excellence, should have been wholly written by a boy of fifteen. This argument, at first, conveys great force, but it vanishes into "thin air," when the character and qualities of this marvellous youth are duly estimated.

When we consider Chatterton as the sole author of Rowley, and that he composed the whole of these poems between the age of fourteen and sixteen; without hyperbole, and in the soberest estimate, it is fair to proclaim him the very first of all premature geniuses. The high ground which he occupies, does not arise from acquirements; there, he has been surpassed by the admirable Crichton, Clench, Servin, Barretier, Stone, Buxton, Psalmanazar, Murray, &c.; but Chatterton's superiority arises from that which is far more unequivocal; from his writings; from his original effort! The individuals with whom he is contrasted, (with the exception of Buxton,) had read more, knew more, and dazzled more, by the multiplicity of their acquisitions; but neither one, nor all united, ever WROTE, at his age, with half the commanding superiority of the Blue-coat boy of Bristol.

Dean Milles, in his admiration of Rowley, appeared (strangely enough !) to derive pleasure from depreciating Chatterton, who had avowed himself the writer of that

inimitable poem, "The Death of Syr Charles Bawdin," but the Dean, well knowing the train of fearful, and inevitable consequences which would follow on this admission, laboured hard to impeach the veracity of our bard, and represented him as one who, from vanity, assumed to himself the writing of another! We know well how to interpret this declaration, but Dean Milles affirms, that of this "Death of Syr Charles Bawdin," "A greater variety of internal proofs may be produced,

*See Biographical Notices at the end.

for its authenticity, than for that of any other piece in the whole collection!" This, virtually, was abandoning the question; for, since we know that Chatterton did write "The Death of Syr Charles Bawdin," we know, according to the above admission, that he wrote that which has stronger proofs of its authenticity than all the other pieces in the collection!

The numerous proofs adduced of Chatterton's passion for fictitious statements; of his intimate acquaintance with antiquated language; of the almost preternatural maturity of his mind; of the dissimilitude of Rowley's language to contemporaneous writers; and of the obviously modern structure of all the compositions which the young bard produced, as the writings of Rowley, and others, form, it is presumed, a mass of Anti-Rowleian evidence, which proves that Chatterton possessed that peculiar disposition, as well as those preeminent talents, the union of which was both necessary and equal to the great production of Rowley.

The author may now finally remark, that till of late, the character of Chatterton could have been but imperfectly understood. Independently of his more substantiated, and higher claims, it now derives additional stability from his acknowledged productions, and is exhibited in so many new points of view, that few, hereafter, will recur to the most specious and popular argument, and found the claims of Rowley on the incompetence of Chatterton. The prior absence of this full, and undeniable proof, is some apology for those who have hitherto advocated the "Priest of St. John's," but the spirit of candour will now, doubtless, submit to the weight of evidence, and the laurel be awarded to that ILLUSTRIOUS YOUTH, who reflects honour on the city, the age, and the nation, that produced him, and whose melancholy story will never be remembered but with a sigh!

ESSAY VII.

ON THE

LIFE & CHARACTER OF PSALMANAZAR.

THE individual who is the subject of the two following Essays, in many important respects, was one of the most remarkable men of modern times. The accounts hitherto published of him, have given, it is conceived, an erroneous view of his character, so that some pleasure is derived from the intention, at least, of doing him simple justice, without revilement, extenuation, or flattery; independently of which, a narrative of Psalmanazar is not an unsuitable appendage to that of Chatterton; the two most distinguished of literary forgers. The young, also, may receive instruction from the example of Psalmanazar, and learn to tremble at the acceleration which marks the descent of profligacy and deception, from one position to another, till the victim of his own delusion often sinks into disgrace, contempt, and interminable ruin.

George Psalmanazar was an assumed name. His real name, as well as his country, he never disclosed, although there can be no doubt of his having been a native of the South of France. At six years of age he was sent to a public school, when his master, perceiving in him decided marks of superiority, placed him, at once, in the Latin class, and before he had been in it a year, he surpassed all the elder boys, and ascended to the top of his form. His successive masters were proud of their pupil, and from their injudicious encomiums, he dated that love of praise, and that passion for vain glory which so influenced the earlier part of his life.

At the age of nine, he was removed to a college, in