pation of the modern from the restraints of the ancient tongue, which charactarizes the period known as the age of Louis XIV. The composition of Latin verso was imposed only upon those scholars who manifested some poetical faculty; to others, the task could only be painful and productive of no result. But sometimes it was thought well to exercise a whole class in this way; the subject was chosen by the teacher, and each of the scholars was at liberty to suggest a word, a phrase, a turn of expression, as the inspiration of the moment might prompt. Idiomatic translations of several classic authors were made for the use of the schools, which, it is hardly necessary to say, were carefully expurgated.

The study of the Greek language was much neglected in France during the seventeenth century, and the labors of Port Royal did not succeed in effecting more than a temporary revival. The Greek Grammar, which was, like the Latin, the production of Lancelot, is, as all grammars must be, to some extent a compilation from preceding works, but differs from most in the full and modest acknowledgment of its obligations. But the credit is due to Lancelot of having perceived that the Greek is much more similar in construction and spirit to any modern language than the Latin; and that the difficulties which beset the learner lie rather in the copiousness of its vocabulary than in the intricacies of its syntax. He discarded, therefore, the hitherto universally accepted plan of approaching the Greek through the Latin; his grammar is written, his translations are rale, not in Latin but in French. A less successful book was a 'Jardin des Racines Grecques,' which was thrown by De Saçi into the form of mnemonic verses, which are often as barbarcu as the etymologies which they contain are defective. Yet even this was not without its merits, as no French and Greek dictionary existed at that time; and the meaning of a Greek word could penetrate into the student's mind only through the medium of an inadequate Latin equivalent. Perhaps after all, the result of the Greek learning of Port Royal is most visible in the tragedies of Racine; though none would more sincerely have lamented, than Lancelot and Nicole, that the same learning which enabled men to read the New Testament in the original, should help them produce such profane masterpieces as Andromaqut and Iphigénie.

The grammars which I have already mentioned were accompanied by others from the same fertile pen. The Latin Grammar was first published in 1644, dedicated to, and if the traditions of Port Royal may be trusted, used by, the young king. The Greek Grammar did not appear till 1655. Both of these were also published in an abridged form. An Italian and a Spanish Grammar on the same plan, followed in 1660, and four treatises on Latin, French, Italian, and Spanish Poetry, respectively, in 1663. Besides the 'Garden of Greek Roo's' which appeared in 1957, and many volumes of translations from Phædrus, Fantus, Terence, Virgil, and Cicero, which it is not necessary to specify more particularly, a selection of Epigrams [Epigrammatum Delectus] with a Latin preface by Nicole, was printed in 1659. A volume of 'Elements of Geometry,' by Arnauld, which had been long used in manuscript, was first given to the world in 1667, of which it is sufficient to say that Pascal, when he saw it, burned a little treatise on the same subject which he had compiled.

A comparison of dates will show that many of these works were not published till after the schools of Port Royal had been finally closed. They were the records and monuments of the teaching which had been there given; the instruments by which Lancelot and Nicole exercised their functions to a continually increasing extent, after they were driven from Le Chênai and Les Granges. It is not the first instance in which persecution has only spread over a wider surface the influence which it was designed to extirpate.

The 'Grammaire générale et raisonnée, contenant les Fondemens de l'Art de Parler, expliqués d'une Manière claire et naturelle, les Raisons de ce qui est commun à toutes les Langues et des principales Différences qui s'y rencontrent, et plusieurs Remarques nouvelles sur la Langue Françoise, 1660,' stands on a different footing from the works already enumerated, as one of the first contributions to the science of general or comparative grammar which has since engaged so much of the attention of students. Arnauld and Lancelot are the joint authors. The latter, meeting with many difficulties in the composition of his several grammars, brought them to Arnauld to be resolved. He was so much struck with the philosophical penetration displayed by his master, that he obtained permission to throw his ideas into the connected form in which the Grammaire Générale' now appears. To attempt to criticise this once celebrated book would be out of place. The advantage of literary over scientific works is, that while the former are possessions forever, the latter aro continually left behind by the advancing wave of human knowledge; only the stu lent of mathematical history can afford time to read the 'Principia,' while the 'Paradise Lost' flourishes in perennial youth. So, however just might be the theory, however cogent the reasonings of the 'Grammaire Générale,' the facts upon which its inductions are based were necessarily few and imperfectly known. Large families of languages, which are now objects of the grammarian's closest and most fruitful study, were then unknown; and the roal affinities of those which were the subjects of comparison hardly sus pected. When all these drawbacks are fully estimated, when it is allowed that the gun nars of Port Royal have been long superseded by simpler and more scientific methods, that its etymology was not in advance of the age, that its translations from the classics were periphrastic and unclassical, and that the schools cannot be said to have produced a Latinist or a Hellenist of more than average merit, the credit due to the modest teachers of the Rue St. Dominique remain unimpaired. Their improvements in the art of education have not been cast away as delusive, but have been carried to a higher pitch of perfection by the experience of succeeding generations. In no particular were they behind, in many far before their time. Their work, which began in the love of childhood, and in a deep religious respect for its comparative innocence, was conducted to the end under a sense of moral responsibility which introduced a new element into the relation between the teacher and the scholar. Nor do I know where else in that age to look for a modest yet dignified assertion of the worth of the teacher's office, a worth which society even now but partially recognizes. And to the allegation that the schools of Port Royal produced no great scholars, the sufficient reply is that their single object was the education of Christian men.

The mention of the 'Grammaire Générale' naturally leads us to its more celebrated companion, The Port Royal Logic,' a work which, if we may judge from the fact that a recent English translation of it has reached a fourth edition, seems to defy the attacks of time. Its full title is 'La Logique, ou l'Art de Penser, contenant, outre les Règles communes, plusieurs Observations nouvelles, propres à former le Jugement, 1662.' The following account of its origin is given in the preface. A nameless 'person of quality,' talking one day to the young Duc de Chevreuse, 'happened to mention to him that he had, when himself young, met with a person who in fifteen days made him acq tainted with the greater part of logic.' Another person, perhaps Arnauld, rple that if M. de Chevreuse would take the trouble, he would impart to him all of logic that was worth knowing in four or five days. The challenge w3 accepted, and an abstract of logical science drawn up, which the young duke, whose aptitude for acquiring knowledge is described as remarkable,

easily committed to memory within the specified time. But the work grew upon the author's hands; MS. copies were circulated; then in 1662 it was printed. A second edition followed in 1664, a third in 1668, a fourth in 1674, a fifth in 1683, each of which successively was improved and enlarged. It was soon translated into Latin, in which language it was repeatedly reprinted; into Spanish, and into Italian. The first English translation appeared proba bly as early as 1685; another in 1716; and both went through more than one edition. A new translation, accompanied by an excellent introduction and notes, has of late years been made by Mr. T. Spencer Baynes.

The Logic' in its present shape is preceded by two discourses, 'in which the design of this new Logic is set forth,' and 'containing a reply to the principal objections which have been made to this Logic.' Both of these are from the pen of Nicole. The work itself is divided into four parts, of which the three first, according to Racine, 'were composed in common,' while the fourth is altogether Arnauld's. Most of the additions made after the publication of the first edition are due to Nicole. At the same time the book, both in its conception and the most important part of its execution, must be considered as having proceeded from the mind of Arnauld.

Its fourfold division is based on what are called the four principal operations of the mind, conceiving (concevoir), judging (juger), reasoning (raisonner), and disposing (ordonner). In other words, the first part treats of ideas, the second of propositions, the third of syllogisms, and the fourth of method. But this general statement gives only a partial idea of the object of the work. There is nothing here which, under certain conditions of treatment, might not be brought within the strict scope of a logical hand-book. Our authors, however, take a wider than the ordinary range. Their second title, The Art of Thinking,' better expresses their intention than the first. 'Logic,' they say, 'is the art of directing reason aright, in obtaining the knowledge of things, for the instruction both of ourselves and others.' Its chief end, therefore, is rather practical than theoretical; not so much the analysis of the syllogistic or any method of reasoning, as, in general, the production of the 'mens sana.' The first preliminary discourse begins, "There is nothing more desirable than good sense and accuracy of thought in discriminating between truth and falsehood. All other qualities of mind are of limited use, but exactness of judgment is of general utility in every part and in all the employments of life.' They think that the efficacy of logic in producing this quality of mind has been much overrated. But the absurd pretensions in behalf of the science which have been put forward by scholastic philosophers, do not form a reason for rejecting the solid advantages to be derived from it; and therefore they have incorporated with their book a selection from the common rules. 'Now,' they proceed, ‘although we cannot say these rules are useless, since they often help to discover the vice of certain intricate arguments, and to arrange our thoughts in a more convenient manner, still this utility must not be supposed to extend very far. The greater part of the errors of men arises, not from their allowing themselves to be deceived by wrong conclusions, but in their proceeding from false judgments, whence wrong conclusions are deduced. Those who have previously written on logic have sought but little to rectify this, which is the main design of the new reflections which are to be found scattered through this book.' Accordingly, while all the technical part of the old manuals is not only to be found here, but is stated with a clearness, and illustrated by a variety of examples, which are themselves characteristic of the book, its most valuable portions are undoubtedly those sections which approach the art of thinking from the moral or practical side, and treat of the 'sophisms of self-love, of interest, and of passion,' and 'of the false

reasonings which arise from objects themselves;' as well as the whole of the last part, which draws its inspiration from Des Cartes' celebrated 'Discourse on Method,'

To point out the particulars in which the 'Art of Thinking,' considered purely as a logical treatise, differs from previous treatises of the same kind, is a work which belongs to the historian of mental sciences. But we may be allowed to notice here its intensely practical treatment of what had hitherto, for the most part, been a merely formal and scholastic subject of study. It took up the series of pedantically expressed rules which were supposed to supply the only method by which the human mind could investigate truth; and on the one hand found a base for them in the living metaphysical thought of the day, on the other connected them with the whole procedure of science and the conduct of daily life. The very illustrations introduced into the most formal portion of the whole, have shaken off the frost of ages of scholasticism. Generation after generation of pupils had repeated the old examples, some of which had descended from the time even of Porphyry and Aristotle; now for the first time we find ourselves in the regions of modern thought-in the sacramental controversies between Catholic and Huguenot-in the debate of 'matière subtile' and the vacuum. The living French is substituted for the dead Latin as the medium of instruction. The scholar whom the teachers of philosophy sought to train, was one who could argue accurately from given premises, in the syllogistic form, and was quick, by help of the same instrument, to detect the fallacies of other reasoners. The logician of Port Royal was the man of a sound and practised judgment; not ignorant of the subtleties of the schools, but accustomed to examine the soundness of his assumptions as well as of his arguments; and even if not a philosopher or a man of science, yet possessed of a philosophic and scientific mind.

It must not be forgotten that as far as Port Royal can be said to have a philosophy, it is to be found not in Pascal's 'Thoughts,' but in the 'Logic.' Arnauld, after some preliminary skirmishing with Des Cartes, had enrolled himself among his followers, and the 'Logic,' as well as the 'General Grammar,' is the legitimate offspring of the 'Discourse on Method.' On the other hand, the first Preliminary Discourse contains a fierce onslaught upon the Pyrrhonists, whom it summarily qualifies as a 'sect of liars,' and the chapter on 'the Sophisms of Self-love' halts in its argument to gibbet the vices and follies of Montaigne. The whole passage is so far removed from the calm and equal tone of the rest of the book, as to suggest the idea of a personal polemic against one whose influence Port Royal had been unable to eradicate from the mind of Pascal. But in truth Port Royal is not philosophical. Arnauld has a name among metaphysicians, Nicole among moralists, Pascal among religious philosophers; but the speculations of the three could not be united into one accordant whole; and no one of them was Port Royalist on his philosophical side. St. Cyran, Singlin, De Saçi, are, after all, our most characteristic figures; and the Bible and St. Augustine, not Aristotle aud the schoolmen, are the fountains of their wisdom.

Pupils of the Port Royal Schools.

A list of those who were educated in the schools of Port Royal would convey little information to English readers. The new methods of education were applied on too small a scale and for too short a time to produce any very startling result. Yet such a list would include the names of nearly all the younger Arnaulds; of the three brothers Du Fossé; of the two sons of Bignon, Avocat Général, one of whom succeeded to his father's office, and the other obtained high legal preferment; of M. de Harlay, the French Plenipotentiary at the Peace of Ryswick; of the Duc de Chevreuse, whose name has been already

mentioned in connection with that of his tutor, Lancelot; of the nephews of Pascal; and of many more worthy scions of Parliamentary families, who in the latter years of the century preserved the memory of their place of education by the grave and austere spirit of their life and magistracy. It is curious to note among these the name of a younger son of the noble Scotch house of Lennox, who, adopting his French patronymic of D'Aubigny, entered the Church, became Canon of Nôtre Dame, Almoner of Charles II.'s Portuguese Queen, and died in 1665, a few hours before the arrival of a courier from Rome, who was bringing him a Cardinal's hat. A still more singular name is that of Charles II.'s unfortunate son, the Duke of Monmouth, who, in the time of his father's exile, was sent with his tutor to pass a couple of years (1658-60) at the house of M. de Bernières at Chênai. But the two pupils of whom Port Royal is justly proud are Racine and Tillemont.

Sebastien le Nain de Tillemont, the son of Jean le Nain, Mâitre des Requêtes, and of Dame Marie le Ragois, was born at Paris, November 30th, 1637. His father was an old friend of Port Royal, and when, in the second war of the Fronde, the nuns were compelled to leave the Faubourg to seek refuge in the heart of the city, M. le Nain with M. de Bernières marched at their head. The future historian, when between nine and ten years of age, was sent to the schools of Port Royal, which were then just established in the Rue St. Dominique. The child was father of the man. He showed at this early period not only the same character, but the same tastes as in after-life. Livy was his favorite author; and it is recorded of him that he rarely laid the volume down till he had read an entire book. He passed through the course of classical instruction usual in the schools, and long before the publication of the 'Art de Penser,' was instructed in logic by its authors. The Annals of Baronius engaged his attention while he was still quite a boy, and gave occasion to innumerable questions, which he carried to Nicole. The latter, who was no mean proficient in ecclesiastical history, at first easily satisfied the applicant with an extemporaneous reply; but by and by, the difficulties proposed by the pupil became less easy of solution, and the master ingenuously confesses that he trembled at his approach. But before long Tillemont became dissatisfied with any ecclesiastical history at second hand. At eighteen he began to study the Scriptures and the Fathers for himself, and arranged all the facts which he found there according to the plan of Usher's Annals, a book which he had read with much pleasure.

When, in 1656, the schools at Port Royal des Champs were broken up, Tillemont, with his friend Du Fossé and a good priest, in whose charge they were placed, retired to Paris, and, in a little house in the Rue des Postes, spent some four years in hard study. About Lent, 1660, the two friends removed to Les Troux, now empty by the death of M. de Bagnols and the final dispersion of the schools, in order that they might especially apply themselves to Church history, under the supervision of the learned curate of the parish, M. Burlugai. But before long Tillemont found it expedient to seek a refuge in the universal asylum of the Jansenists, the diocese of Beauvais, where the Bishop received him with open arms. Here he spent eight or nine years in quiet study, part of the time in the seminary, part in the house of M. Hermant. Already he was beginning to be regarded as one who possessed more than a common knowledge of the first ages of the Church; and his modesty was sorely wounded by the deference paid to his opinion by his superiors in age and ecclesiastical rank. At last, when M. de Beauvais, after having induced him to receive the tonsure, ́informed him that his greatest earthly consolation would be the hope of having him as the successor to his See, the modest student fairly fled, and with his father's permission once more took up his abode with Du Fossé in Paris,