& novo orbe, gives some account of Cortes's expedition. But he proceeds no further than to relate what happened after his first landing This work, which is brief and slight, seems to contain the information transmitted by Cortes in his first dispatches, embellished with several particulars communicated to the author by the officers who brought the letters from Cortes.

"But the book towards which the greater part of modern historians have had recourse for information concerning the conquest of New Spain, is, Historia de la Conquista de Mexico, per D. Antonio de Solis, first published A. D. 1684. I know no author in any language, whose literary fame has risen so far beyond his real merit. De Solis is reckoned by his countrymen one of the purest writers in the Castilian tongue; and if a foreigner may venture to give his opinion coneerning a matter, of which Spaniards alone are qualified to judge, he is entitled to that praise. But though his language be correct, his taste in composition is far from being just. His periods are so much laboured, as to be often stiff, and sometimes tumid; the figures which he employs by way of ornament, are trite or improper, and his observations superficial. These blemishes, however, might easily be overlooked, if he were not defective with respect to all the great qualities of an historian. Destitute of that patient industry in research, which conducts to the knowledge of truth; a stranger to that impartiality which weighs evidence with cool attention, and ever eager to establish his favourite system of exalting the character of Cortes into that of a perfect hero, exempt from error, and adorned with evry virtue, he is less solicitous to discover what is true, than to relate what might appear splendid.

When

When he attempts any critical discussion, his reasona ings are fallacious, and founded upon an imperfect view of facts. Though he sometimes quotes the dispatches of Cortes, he seems not to have consulted them; and though he sets out with some censure on Gomara, he frequently prefers his authority, the most doubtful of any, to that of the other cotemporary historians.

"But of all the Spanish writers, Herrera furnishes the fullest and most accurate information concerning the conquest of Mexico, as well as every other transaction in America The industry and attention with which he consulted not only the books, but the original papers and public records, which tended to throw any light upon the subject of his inquiries, were so great, and he usually judges of the evidence before him with so much impartiality and candour, that his Decades may be ranked among the most judicious and useful historical collections. If by attempting to relate the various occurrences in the New World, in a strict chronological order, the arrangement of events in his work had not been rendered so perplexed, disconnected, and obscure, that it is an unpleasant task to collect from different parts of his book, and piece together the detached shreds of a story, he might justly have been ranked among the most eminent historians of his country. He gives an account of the materials from which he composed his work, Dec. VI. Lib. III. c. 19."*

Robertson's Hist. Amer. 4to. Vol. II. p. 445. Herrera was translated Stephens, 6 vols. 8vo. London. 1740.

De Bure only mentions two of these works in the following words:

Historia de los Hechos de los Castellanos en las islas y Tierra firme del Mare Oceano en VIII. Decadas, desde el anno 1492 hasta el de 1554, por Antonio de Herrera. En Madrid, en la Emprenta Real, 1601-615. 8 tom. en 4 vol. in fol."

"Historia de la Conquista del Mexico de D. Antonio de Solis, en Madrid, 1684, in fol."

"La Misma Historia de la conquista del Mexico de D. Antonio de Solis, con estampas y la vida del Autor, por Juan de Goyeneche. En Brusselas, 1704, in fol."

"Des deux Editions que nous indiquons ici de l'Histoire de la conqueste de Mexique, la premiere est la plus estimée, parcequ'on l'a croit plus correcte; mais la seconde est plus communément recherchèe, attendu qu'elle joint à l'avantage d'être ornée de figures, celui d'être beaucoup mieux exécutée. On peut conclure de là, que les deux Editions doivent être rassemblées dans un Cabinet choisi."* De Bure, Bibl. Instruct. Histoire, Il. 264.

It seems that a collection of these original Historians entitled "Historiadores Primitivos de las Indias Occidentales, by D. And. Gonzal. Barcia," was published at Madrid in 3 vols. fol. 1749.

But a modern translation of one of these historians remains to be particularized, which, as it has received

There was a French Translation "Histoire de la Conqueste du Mexique, eu de la Nouvelle Espagne, trad. de l' Espagnol de Don Antonio de Solis, en François par 31. Citvi de la Guatte, Paris, 1691, in 480. fig.” Ibid. p. 265

the

the high praise of an eminent poet, deserves attention.

This is

"The true History of the Conquest of Mexico, by Captain Bernal Diaz del Castillo, one of the Conquerors. Written in the year 1568. Translated from the original Spanish, by Maurice Keatinge, Esq. 4to. pp. 514. London. 1800."

The Historian says he "brought his history to a conclusion in the loyal city of Guatimala, the residence of the royal Court of Audience, on Feb. 6. 1572.”

It seems, from this authentic writer, as here exhibited, and indeed from other authorities, that Robertson represented the character of Montezuma in by far too unfavourable a light, while he has been too partial to that of Cortes. "The character of the Monarch," say the British Critics, "is highly amiable: frank, generous, and unsuspecting, he forms a perfect contrast with the gloomy, perfidious, sordid and coldblooded Cortes, who is a traitor upon argument, and a murderer upon calculation. Dr. Robertson relates the seizure of the Prince; but he attributes it, with the Spanish historians, or rather the glossers over of Spanish enormities, to the news of the defeat of Juan de Esculante. The doctor had certainly read Diaz, and, to do him justice, makes good use of the old soldier on many occasions; how is it then that he did not consult him on this?"

These Critics conclude in the following words. "How it has happened that the cold, declamatory, and faithless narrative of Antonio de Solis should be naturalized in this country, while the invaluable pages of this honest veteran were only known by Dr. RobertDD 3 son's

son's extracts, we cannot take upon us to say. Possibly the rudeness of the style might repel the common reader; and indeed it required much knowledge of the Spanish tongue to fit the author for an English ear. This knowledge, however, the ingenious translator (Mr. Keatinge) possesses in an eminent degree; and while we warmly recommend "The true History of the Conquest of Mexico," to the notice of our readers, we cannot refuse our tribute of applause to the fidelity, spirit, dexterity, and judgment, with which so important a work has been justly made our own.'

In their last Review (Nov. 1806, p. 491) the same Critics add, that "in the energetic and glowing description of Bernal Diaz, we follow the real Conqueror of Mexico with trembling delight; we see his perils, and are animated by the prodigies of valour exhibited on every side."

Mr. Southey has also consecrated the original and his late translator, in a note to his Madoc." The true History of the Conquest of Mexico," says he, "is indeed a delightful work, and the only account of that transaction, on which we can rely; yet because it appeared without any of those scandalous puffs which disgrace our presses, and teach our literati how to think, it mouldered on the shelf."+

Brit. Crit Vol. XVII. p. 261.

I intend hereafter, with the aid of De Bure, and the learned work of Mr. Clarke, to give an account of De Bry's invaluable collection, entitled ❝India Orientalis, & Occidentalis," in 7 vols. fol. of which complete seta scarcely ever occur; though Mr. White had one not long ago. A complete set has sold for 300 guineas.

ART.