best calculated to reconcile the jarring opinions of parties, to fix the fluctuating ideas relative to the dispute, and to confine the argument to precise terms.

In this controversy, according to Mr. Hill's opinion, there is on both sides confusion and ambiguity. Macpherson and his supporters, either would not, or could not, produce the wished for manuscripts without equivocation: but his adversaries, who were so anxious in their demands, had not the least notion of the Caledonian poems; none of them understood the Gaelic language in which they were written, not even excepting the great Johnson.

The question is naturally divided into three parts: 1. Is Ossian quite an imaginary being of Macpherson's creation? or a traditional hero of the Caledonians?

There can be no doubt, that Fingal and all his family were among the Caledonians and Irish, a race of ancient heroes, who were the rulers of those countries; and that the two nations look upon Ossian as the most famous of all their bards. The history of Fingal is recited in the Highlands with admiration and delight: and upon this the traditional novels and tales are chiefly founded. And here I beg leave to assert, that this medley of fables cannot be a stronger evidence against the reality of Ossian's heroes, than the romances of Turpin and Ariosto may be proofs whereon to deny the existence of Charlemagne and his barons.

2. Are the ancient songs and poems, ascribed to Ossian, respecting the history of his family, really existing among the Caledonians? Did Macpherson

translate from the originals the poems which he published under his name?

It is undeniable that there is in Scotland a great number of songs and poems, which for many centuries have been ascribed to this bard. Hill had copies of the originals he published. In various parts of Scotland, and especially in the shire of Argyle, and district of Lochaber, and other places on the western coast, he was acquainted with several traditional possessors, some of one part some of another, of the collections of those poems. These are more or less copious, and have many considerable variations. It is certain that the facts, the adventures, and many fragments of the poems of Smith and Macpherson, are to be found in them. There is not sufficient ground therefore to doubt, that some of the same orignals might have been procured in various parts, and their transcripts so obtained may be deemed authentic.**

3. But are these poems exactly corresponding to those of Macpherson's Ossian?

This cannot absolutely be affirmed, and it might even be denied without injuring in the least their authenticity. Ossian's poems, whether recited or in manuscript, are subject, as we have mentioned before, to great variations in the different districts of the Highlands of Scotland; not only from the difference of dialects, but from the disunion, alterations, curtailments, additions, and miscellaneous matter introduced into them by reciters or transcribers, in various places, and at different times. The poems of that * See Note S, at the end of the Dissertation.

bard, it appears, were recited in fragments irregularly, and were blended by the vulgar with popular fables and other pieces on similar subjects, composed by posterior bards and senachies, of a genius and style different from that of Ossian, as might be naturally expected in poems which pass through the mouths of the vulgar, and are successively transmitted by memory; and it is probable, that here and there various collections and compilations of them might be made, most of them indigested, without selection or judgment, by inexperienced and ignorant persons. It is therefore reasonable to think, that Macpherson and Smith, having collected together the greatest number they could of such manuscripts, consulted the oldest and best informed people of those countries, and having compared the pieces with each other, were enabled to select from the various readings such as were most suitable to and consistent with the general character of Ossian; they would consequently put together the various fragments in the most rational order, and according to the natural connection of the subjects; thence had it in their power to compile and publish a genuine translation, worthy of the name of that author. Smith candidly confessed both for himself and for his colleague, that such had been their conduct. "After the materials were collected," says he, "the next labour was to compare the different editions; to strike off several parts that were manifestly spurious; to bring together some episodes that appeared to have a relation to one another, though repeated separately; and to restore to their proper places

some incidents that seemed to have run from one poem into another.*-I am very confident, that the poems so arranged are different from all other editions; they have taken a certain air of regularity and of art, in comparison with the disunited and irregular manner of the original." In another place Mr. Smith, speaking of Macpherson, remarks, "that it must be confessed we have not the whole of the poems of Ossian, or even of the collection translated by Mr. Macpherson; yet still we have many of them, and of almost all a part. The building is not entire, but we have still the grand ruins of it."†

In short, although Macpherson had not explicitly imparted to the public the particular quality of his compilation, he gave, however, in various parts of his annotations, sufficient hints that this was the method he adopted. In this place it is proper to observe, that the very system of Macpherson's work may perhaps demonstrate his shyness in showing freely the original. He had in his possession several manuscripts of Ossian, and he had among them the genuine poems of Ossian, which were not to be found in any other edition though dispersed in all. But the true Ossian, as published in English, was only to be found in the compilation made by himself, and transcribed by his own hand. Whatever manuscripts therefore he might have offered to the public, the incredulous and malicious, on comparing the translation with the text, and finding them strictly uniform, would have said, that Macpherson had counterfeited the

See Note T, at the end of the Dissertation. + See Note U, at the end of the Dissertation.

original, with a view to deceive the unwary. For this reason, satisfied with having laid the matter of fact before those few, who were acquainted with the state of the different editions of Ossian, he scorned perhaps to expose himself to the risk of bearing the blame and slander, for that which ought to have rather excited the public estimation and gratitude.

But, whatever may be thought concerning the subject, the opinion of Mr. Hill, on the three questions above discussed, appears rational, and perhaps more satisfactory than any other to the minds of impartial critics; and ought even to have been approved and cherished by Macpherson himself. Perhaps we must think differently of what is given in the latter part of his discourse, on two other questions, which he proposes as supplementary to the preceding ones. 1. He asks, was Ossian Irish or Scotch? 2. What true idea had their countrymen of the Fingalians, and in what light ought we to consider them? On the first question, he decides, that Fingal and his family were Irish heroes, and that Ossian's poems are originally from Ireland. He assigns the following reasons. One of the principal characters in the poems is St. Patrick, the apostle of Ireland; the same poems are found among those of the Scotch particularly on the coast opposite to Ireland. In an account of the irish customs, written by one Good, a schoolmaster at Limerick, in 1556, of which William Camden gives the following extract: "The Irish," says the author, "think, that the souls of the deceased are in communion with famous men of those places, of whom they retain many stories and