number of languages in which he could express himself,' Mezzofanti 'sent him the name of God written with his own. 'hand in fifty-six languages.' To complete the embarrassment, M. Manavit gives a detailed list of fifty-eight languages spoken by the Cardinal; while another writer, the author of a sketch which appeared in the Civiltà Cattolica' (whom M. Manavit quotes, and who states as his authority a conversation with Mezzofanti in 1846), makes the number no less than seventyeight!†

So also, as regards his facility of speaking the several languages, we meet a certain, though by no means the same, amount of discrepancy. M. Manavit's list sets down Irish among his acquirements, upon the very same footing with English, Spanish, German, or any other of the languages in which he is known to have been perfect. Now, we ourselves know that he did not claim to speak Irish thoroughly. He understood and read it perfectly, and with an excellent accent: he was master of the ordinary conversational forms, and of a sufficient stock of words to initiate a conversation, and carry it through its early stages: and it was his habit, on meeting an Irish visitor, to address him in his native tongue, and, if he failed to reply, to banter him good-humouredly on his ignorance of the language of his country. Again, if we took literally Dr. Baines' account as recorded by Miss Mitford, we should conclude that Mezzofanti reported himself to that dignitary as perfect in Welsh, whereas we are informed by Mr. Ellis (himself a Welshman), who must have seen him at a later period, that he was quite unable to keep up or even to understand a conversation in that lan'guage.' In like manner, while many of the authorities are loud in their praise of Mezzofanti's English, Herr Fleck declares that his English was 'only middling.' The same writer, speaking generally of his talents, says that, of course he does not speak all languages with equal readiness;' and Lady Morgan implies even more in the avowal which she attributes to the Cardinal himself, that, although he had gone over the outline of forty languages, he was not master of them, as he had dropped such as had not books worth reading.'

As regards the first of these points, we fear, it is now impossible to arrive at any precise and certain conclusion. It is plain that such accuracy could only be derived either from the testimony of the intimate associates of Mezzofanti, or from some precise and authentic statement of his own; and from all that has been published on the subject, as well as from the

* Pp. 13-40.

VOL. CI. NO. CCV.

† P. 149.

F

most careful inquiry in every available quarter, we are led to believe that no such authoritative information is now attainable. Mezzofanti does not appear, so far as can be inferred from the accounts both public and private which have come under our notice, ever to have taken the trouble of entering into a full' explanation on this precise point. Even if we were to accept without any reserve (which we are by no means disposed to do) the statement of the writer in the Civiltà Cattolica' it is plain that the languages there enumerated, are languages. with which Mezzofanti was in some degree acquainted, but which he by no means professed to speak. The same, we think, is equally apparent in the case of the answer which he is reported to have made to the Russian traveller. One may be said to be able to express himself' in a language without its being implied that he speaks it fluently. At all events, he rather evaded this question than replied to it directly; and it is. clear that the answer which he made to Mrs. Paget (whose superciliousness may well appear to have deserved a quiet rebuke even from so mild a man), that he did not know many lan'guages, as he spoke only forty or fifty,' was intended merely as a good-humoured quiz upon the lady's indiscretion. And, on the other hand, it is equally apparent (although we do not find any trace of his having drawn up such a classification) that the degrees of his familiarity with the various languages which he knew must have been very various. Although it is not strictly true, as alleged by Lady Morgan, that he cultivated only those languages which had a literature, and neglected all the rest, yet it is quite certain that there were some which, from superior opportunities as well, perhaps, as from greater intrinsic attractiveness, he cultivated much more than the rest. No vague statement, therefore, of his having spoken thirty, or forty, or fifty, languages, could convey an accurate notion of his actual power as a linguist. It would be necessary to classify the several languages, and to specify the degree of acquaintance which he possessed with each. Until we shall have some such classified statement before us, there must always remain much uncertainty as to the real extent of his attainments; and unless farther light should be thrown upon it by some of the papers which he left behind, much of the most interesting part of the history of his extraordinary gift must continue enveloped in mystery.

We are by no means left in the same uncertainty, however, regarding the second point; viz., the degree of familiarity which he possessed with (at least) the principal languages which he spoke. The authorities already alleged place it beyond all doubt

that he spoke almost all the leading languages both of the East and West, with all but the freedom, the precision, and the propriety of an educated native of each of the countries. It is not alone that the general fact is attested by many of these authorities; each traveller has borne testimony to his perfection in the language of his own country. Baroness Ulmenstein took him for a German. Prince Volkonski would be very glad if his son spoke Russian as well;' Stewart Rose's Smyrniote declared that he might pass for a Greek or Turk throughout the 'dominions of the Grand Seignior.' Baron von Zach was. 'taken by surprise, and stupefied by his excellent Magyar.' Molbech found him speak Danish with almost entire correctness;' and Fleck heard him speak Modern Greek to a "young man who came into the library, Hebrew with a rabbi or scrittore of the Vatican, Russian with a magnate who passed through, Latin and German with himself, Danish with a young Danish archæologist, English with the English, Italian with 'many.' We have ourselves repeatedly received explicit and equally precise assurances, not only from French, Spaniards, Portuguese, and Poles, but from Orientals of every variety of race and of tongue. We must refer to M. Manavit for a very interesting account of his minute acquaintance with the various provincial dialects of France and Spain (pp. 108-110. 118121.), and particularly with the Basque language, which, as we have seen, he proposed to study with Guido Görres. Of his familiarity with English (although Fleck says, 'his English ' was only middling,') the accounts given by the English themselve seem almost more marvellous. He astounded Byron even 'to his English;' Captain Smyth said, 'he spoke it more correctly 'than himself.' Lady Morgan could not detect any trace of accent, although (at that time) he had never left Bologna.' With Dr. Baines he spoke it as fluently as we do, and with the 'same accuracy, not only of grammar but of idiom.' And, even as far back as 1817, Stewart Rose attests that, during long repeated conversations in English, he never once misapplied the 'sign of a tense, that fearful stumbling to Scotch and Irish!'*

6

As an example of the extraordinary richness, accuracy, and precision of his vocabulary (both in English and in German), we may mention an anecdote which we heard from one of the parties. On a broiling day in summer, two Englishmen (both now eminent, and one in the very highest rank of English literature) were walking with Mezzofanti across the Pincian Hill; they were all conversing at the moment in German, and one of the Englishmen, wishing to say that 'it was truly a sweltering day,' hesitated and turned to ask his English com

We may add, upon our own part, the fullest confirmation of these statements; and perhaps we shall best illustrate them by stating that we have known more than one instance in which Irish visitors meeting him for the first time, have taken him for an English ecclesiastic, mistaking the slight foreign peculiarity which he retained, for what is called in Ireland the English accent.'

It would appear, indeed, as if, in acquiring a new language, Mezzofanti gave his whole mind to it for the time, and as if, when he had mastered it, he possessed the faculty, so rare even with the most practised linguists, of thinking directly in that language, rather than translating his thoughts into it from any other medium. Mezzofanti, too, was one of the few linguists whom we ever knew to succeed as a punster in foreign languages; and he had the curious faculty, besides, of acquiring with the words of each language the peculiar expletive interjectional sounds which characterise the native pronunciation of each, and by the absence of which foreigners are invariably detected. It was remarkable, too, that, in speaking Latin with the nations of different countries, he never failed to accommodate his pronunciation of that language to the national usages of the person with whom he conversed, which, in some Latin words, are such as to render natives of different countries who employ them, entirely unintelligible to each other.

We have already said, indeed, that the operations of his linguistic faculty partook more of the nature of an instinct than of an intellectual exercise. It has been not inaptly compared to the gift possessed by some musicians, of learning from ear, by a single effort, and retaining with unerring fidelity, the most difficult and complicated musical compositions. He himself often declared that every language had a certain rhythm (he meant, probably, in its structural inflections), which it was necessary to master in order to follow the language with facility. His mind possessed an instinctive power of catching up and echoing back this mysterious rhythm; and there can be no doubt that, in this power, coupled with the singular quickness and retentiveness of his memory, lay the secret of his prodigious success as a linguist."

panion what was the corresponding German expression. Without a moment's pause, and before the Englishman could speak, Mezzofanti interposed, Schwülig, of course.' How many natives of either country would have been equally ready with such an out-of-the-way epithet whether in English or in German?

* Among the notable phenomena of Mezzofanti's linguistic faculty, it may be mentioned that in a severe illness (contracted during his visit to the Chinese College at Naples), delirium having set in, he com

It would be a great mistake, nevertheless, to infer that Mezzofanti was a mere mechanical linguist, and not a scientific philological scholar. It is unhappily true that he has not left behind any fruits worthy of the vast resources of his mind; and he himself, more than any one else, regretted that his philological studies came too late in life to be turned to much scientific purpose. In conversation with Guido Görres, he expressed his regret that his youth had fallen upon a period in which languages were not studied from that philosophical point of 'view in which they are now regarded.' Nevertheless, Görres 'found him well acquainted with the philological labours of the 'German, French, and English authors, and especially with the Sanscrit school of Berlin, with Bopp, Rosen, Klaproth, and 'Schlegel.' Molbech says that he was not merely a linguist, but was well acquainted with literary history and bibliography; and Jacobs bears similar testimony to his philological attainments. It would be impossible, however, that a man who was devoted to the actual study of languages, in so far as they are collections of words, could attain the same eminence in the science of languages as those who made the latter their peculiar study; and it is only to be regretted, that while Mezzofanti was in possession of these unexampled stores, he was not, by some lucky combination, thrown into close relations with some of the great comparative philologers of the day, and thus enabled to lend to their theoretical explorations the aid of his practical familiarity with those details which to them could be only known in theory and by conjecture. What might not science hope for from the union of Mezzofanti with Rask or Remusat!

In general learning, it might hardly be expected that he should have attained to much eminence; but he held a respectable rank in almost every department. In the peculiar sciences of his own profession his name stood high in Rome. He was a skilful canonist, and a well-informed theologian. He was not an eloquent preacher, but his familiar lectures (especially instructions intended for children, for which he had a peculiar taste) were most touching and impressive. We should add that he more than once preached extempore in Polish to the soldiers at Bologna. Nor can he be

pletely lost his knowledge of foreign languages, and for several days could not speak a word except his native Italian. It is stated by Mr. Fleck that the various languages became confused in his memory; but we have it on the authority of Mezzofanti himself, that the languages were not confused, but for the time entirely lost by him. This would seem to show that his attainments were chiefly through the faculty of memory.