and Berlin editions, the correfpondence is differently arranged, and in the former, as we have lately had occafion to remark, there are many additions from the edition of Bafil. It will, however, be proper to follow, as we have hitherto done, the original edition. The correfpondence with M. Jordan is the first part of the epiftolary commerce of Frederic, as it is arranged by the count de Hertfberg. It begins in April, 1739, and contains the earlieft literary communications of the prince, for he was not yet king. The Berlin editors knew who M. Jordan was, and have faid nothing about him; the English have been more complaifant, and prefixed a fhort account of a life but little varied. He was a Pruffian, educated for the church, and, during fome years, a pious and exemplary prieft: on the death of a wife whom he dearly loved, he travelled into different countries, to add, by the converfation of the most distinguished literary men, to the ftore of science which in his retirement he had copiously collected from books. On his return, he was made privy-counfellor, and fuperintendant of the police of Berlin, where various falutary regulations are attributed to his judgment and difcretion. He died early, and hiftory feems not to have ftained his fame by imputing to him any improper compliances to the irreligion or the frailties of Frederic: a little flattery to a king, and to fuch a king, is allowable. The letters of the king are sprightly fallies of good-humoured raillery, ludicrous defcriptions of the events of his journeys, interíperfed with many lively rhymes, for the king was not yet a poet: M. Jordan fends the king in return, the goffiping tales of the idle circle in the metropolis, accounts of new publications, political reports, and the light anecdotes which occur. The following letter is an advantageous specimen of the king's humanity, and of the general ftyle of this correfpondence. From the king. Fredericus Jordano Salutation. The Camp at Kuttenberg, At length I inform you of the fo long-expected fo much defired intelligence, the end for which war was made, the great article of news, in a word, the conclufion of a good and advantageous peace. I give you time to breathe. I imagine news fo little expected and fo agreeable, may happen to incite pleafure. Let not your joy, however, be indifcreet. I forbid you to mention it till the affair fhall become public. • I have acted as I thought was neceffary for the glory of my nation; at prefent I act for its happinefs. The blood of my troops is dear to me; I ftop up every channel of further effufion, X which which a war, carried on with barbarians, muft inevitably have caufed, and I fhall now once more yield to pleasures of the body, and to the philofophy of mind. I fhall be at Berlin towards the 15th or 20th of July. Take care to be in good health about that time, and make provifion of whatever your mind can imagine moft diverting and mott agreeable. In a word, let me find in you the wisdom of Plato, the eloquence of Cicero, the docile complaifance of Atticus, and the aid of Epicurus. Adieu, moft pacific Jordan; the Hector thy friend will foon falute thee in the modeft and fimple guife of a philofopher.' The last letter of Jordan is dated April 24, 1745, and he died the 24th of May following. In the London editions the letters of M. Jordan are added: in that of Berlin are those of the king only. The letters of the king to M. de Voltaire follow, and fill the remainder of the eighth volume, the ninth, and about one half of the tenth they occur in the fixth, seventh, and eighth of the London edition, containing numerous additions from that of Bafil: the additions are indeed fo numerous, that we are prevented from mentioning them particularly. It is only neceffary to obferve that the Berlin edition has not preferved the first letters of the king. To follow the different fubjects would be a difficult and unpleafing task; it would be difficult, as the mifcellaneous nature of this correfpondence defies abridgment; and unpleafing, as the general conduct of it muft excite frequent reprehenfion, and fometimes indignation. Infincerity is its ruling trait, which if it had not been acknowledged, must be seen from the exaggerated and hyperbolical compliments. Ancient and modern hiftory, the heathen mythology, the law, and the gospel, are tortured for allufions to render flattery more agreeable, the compliment more ingenious, or the turn more happy. Each is acting a part, and though the king is for a time fincere, he even overacts his fincerity; they are two prize-fighters waiting for a lucky hit,' not to offend, but to pleafe; two courtiers eager to excel in the talent of making themfelves agreeable to cach other. Yet in this mutual intercourfe of compliment, fome occafional remarks deferve our attention: we shall extract a paffage or two of this kind. The history of the czar which I fend you, obliges me to retract what the high opinion I had entertained of this monarch had induced me to affirm. He will appear very different to you in this history from the picture your imagination has formed; and, if I may be fo allowed to fay, we shall have a great man the lefs in the real world. A concourfe of fortunate circumftances, favourable accidents, and the ignorance of foreigners, have metamorphofed the czar into a heroical phantom, of of the grandeur of which no perfon has thought proper to doubt. A fage hiftorian, in part a witnefs of his life, indifcreetly draws the curtain, and fhews us the fovereign with all the defects of men, and few of their virtues. He is no longer that univerfal genius which all conceives and all would penetrate, but a man, governed by whims, which had fufficient novelty to dazzle, and impart a degree of fplendor. He is no longer the intrepid warrior who fears and knows not peril, but a cowardly and timid prince, whofe brutality forfakes him in danger; cruel in peace, feeble in war, admired by strangers, hated by his fubjects, and, in fine, a man who extended defpotifm as far as a monarch could extend it, and with whom fortune was the fubftitute of wisdom. In other refpects, a great mechanic, laborious, affiduous, and ready to facrifice his all for the gratification of his curiofity. Such will the czar Peter the Great appear to you in thefe memoirs, and though we are obliged to obliterate an infinite number of prejudices before we can prevail on ou felves to view him thus ftripped of all his great qualities, it is, however, very certain the author advances nothing which he has not fully the power to prove. Hence we may conclude we never can be fufficiently on our guard when judging of great men. Those who have contemplated Pompey with eyes of admira ion in the Roman history, will behold him with a very different afpect when they read his character in the letters of Cicero. Properly speaking, the fame of men is the gift of the hiftorian. Some appearances of great actions have induced the writers of this age to favour the czar, and their imaginations have very generously fupplied whatever they thought was deficient in the portrait. 6 Alexander, perhaps, was only a famous freebooter; yet Quintius Curtius has found the means, whether it were to abufe the credulity of the people, or to difplay the elegance of his own style, to make all fucceeding ages believe him to be one of the greatest men the earth ever bore. How many examples do hiftorians furnish of a marked predilection in behalf of the fame of certain princes!' Voltaire's criticisms on Frederic's orthography, and his filence refpecting the prince's (he was then only prince) criticifm on two lines of Merope, fhow that Frederic did not really stand high in the opinion of this Atlas of literature. Voltaire is often abruptly short in answer to the prince's encomium on the metaphyfics of Wolf; and though he pays fome attention to Frederic's philofophical fuggeftions, he does not seem to esteem them highly. In short, Voltaire was not the monarch of philofophy and metaphyfics, and near his throne there muft be no brother. The deitical allufions, and the atheistical raillery do not very often offend; but it fhould have been the editor's care that they never fhould have offended. The quarrel between thefe two redoubtabie heroes in the field X 4 field of literature is well known; it has been faid that the reconciliation was never very fincere, and this is fupported by the correspondence before us. The veteris veftigia flammæ’ occafionally break out in peevish remarks and tranfitory reproaches; but they are too dear to each other, perhaps more properly, too neceffary to each other, to feparate for ever, Even in the most active moments of the war of 1759, the king wrote regularly to Voltaire. The poem written before the battle of Rofbach is well known, and we fhall transcribe fome of Frederic's cooler remarks after thefe favourable events. From the king. Breflaw, January 16, 1758. I have received your letter dated the 22d of November, and your other of the d of January, on the fame day. I fcarcely had time to write in profe, much lefs in verfe, in reply, I thank you for the part which you take in the fortunate chances by hich I have been feconded at the clofe of a campaign when all feemed loft. Live happy and peaceably at Geneva; to him who does not fo live the world is a cypher; and pray that the inflammatory heroic fever of Europe may foon be cured, that the triumvirate may be ruined, and that the tyrants of the earth may make no use of those chains which they have forged for its flavery. FREDERIC. I am not ill either in body or mind, but I am taking fome reft in my chamber. This is what has given birth to the rumours which my enemies have fpread. Imay, however, anfwer them as Demofthenes did the Athenians." Well, if Philip were dead, what then? Oh Athenians! you then would foon raife up another Philip!" Oh Auftrians! your ambition, and your defire of univerfal dominion, would foon raife you up other enemies; and the freedom of Germany, and that of Europe, would never want defenders!' The letters which the king wrote in these emergencies; thofe on the first dangerous illness of his father, a few months before his death; and on his acceffion, are admirable, and would have established his credit as a philofopher, a man of cool reflection and humanity, if nothing else had ever appeared. He difowned the first edition of the Antimachiavel, in confequence of the numerous alterations Voltaire had made in it. Advancing age, which cools all paffions, rendered thefe former friends more dear to each other. Had the laft days of Voltaire's life been fent at Potsdam, they might have been distinguished by the fincereft reconciliation. These volumes of the correfpondence with Voltaire, however, offer fo fo many fubjects of remark, that we must close them abruptly: the laft letter of Voltaire was written from Paris, in April, 1775, a few days before his death; he then preferved his ruling paffion. In the middle of the tenth volume of the Berlin edition are the letters to the marchionefs of Chatelet. Thefe, in the London, are increafed in number, by the addition of twenty letters from the lady, which are added in the Berlin edition, at the end of the twelfth volume; but there are no letters of Frederic after he was king. We find nothing very interefting in this correfpondence: it is a commercial intercourfe of compliment, a barter where so much is given, because as much is in turn required. The letters to the marquis d'Argens follow, but the answers are, as ufual in the Berlin edition, referred to the later volumes: they occur in the thirteenth. If they were of fervice in completing the works of Frederic, they fhould undoubtedly, as in the London edition, been properly difpofed with the letters to which they refer, The marquis was the friend, the fincere friend of Frederic. He was his agent in France, Italy, and particularly in Berlin, where he refided during almoft the whole of the feven years war. These letters, which occur in the tenth volume of the London edition, are not particularly interefting. Perhaps the king fpeaks more freely and undifguifedly of the events of the war to the marquis than to any other perfon, and in that view the letters are of importance. In the eleventh and part of the twelfth volumes of each edition are the letters from M. d'Alembert, joined in that of London, with the answers. The first letter is from M. d'Alembert, but it refers to others from the king. It is dated March 11, 1760; and the laft, wh ch reaches to the twelfth volume in the English edition, is dated September, 1783: it was the best period of the king's life, and the correfpondence, in which he appears to most advantage; to advantage, not from pedantic difcuffions, difquifitions laboured with anxiety for the fake of future publication, but from little traits of knowledge, judgment, information, and humanity; interfperfed among eafy trifles, when the spring of the mind is relaxed; in the intervals of more important bufinefs, in which the king endea vours to escape from his labours and from himself. We shall extract but two fpecimens: I was flattered by your approbation of my opinion concerning the patriarch of Ferney. Enlightened poflerity will envy France this phenomenon of liter ture, and blame the nation for not having fufficiently known his worth. Men of fuch genius appear but feldom. Grecian antiquity afforded one Homer, the father |