The manuscript, which is in folio, had been arranged by Richer himself, in order to go to the press, but he died without causing it to be printed. A publisher, (Debure, the elder,) about the year 1750, gave this manuscript to be inspected by the Abbé Lenglet and Mr. Burigny, well known as the writers of the lives of Grotius, Erasmus, and Cardinal Perron, who entertained a very high opinion of this work on the Pucelle of Orleans; and conceived that, with some trifling alterations, it would meet a favourable reception from the public. Instigated by these suggestions, the bookseller engaged M. l'Abbé d'Artigny to undertake the arrangement of Richer's work, and make the necessary changes and corrections: with which demand M. d'Artigny acquiesced, and had began his literary labour when the production of the Abbé Lenglet made its appearance.

During the three or four months that the manuscript of Richer continued in the hands of the latter gentleman for the purpose of undergoing examination, he had extracted the most essential parts, and from thence completed his undertaking. He then returned the manuscript to the publisher, without making mention of the transcripts he had made, and immediately afterwards his work was issued into publicity. This history, therefore, is nothing more than an extract, or abridgement of Richer's manuscript. Without the precipitancy with which Abbé Lenglet arranged his manuscript, he might have given to the world an excellent account of Jeanne d'Arc; for, with more research, and aided with the precious manuscript of Richer, he would have formed

a complete history; but it was necessary that he should expedite his sheets under the fear of being superseded, and this consideration prevented him from consulting all the authorities which were open to him. The divisions and the order observed by Abbé Lenglet, in the progress of his history, differ very little from that composed by Richer, as the Abbé d'Artigny positively affirms; whereto he adds, that "Abbé Lenglet does not record a single act, which is not to be found in the manuscript of Richer," which he states having had in his own possession. The arrangement of the feats recorded is the same in both histories, from the birth of Jeanne d'Arc, until the period of her death.

For an ample detail of this history, see L'Année Littéraire, for 1754, vol. i. p. 217; Mémoires d'Artigny, vol. ii, p. 41, and vol. vii. p. 326; Le Journal des Savans, for November, 1753; and M. De L'Averdy, p. 185 of vol. iii. of the manuscripts in the Royal Library at Paris.

Lenglet Dufresnoy, in the second volume of his History of La Pucelle, enumerates the several testimonies in favour of Jeanne d'Arc, extracted from a great number of foreign authors. These he produces, in chronological order, from the period when La Pucelle was presented to Charles VII., until nearly the end of the fifteenth century.

Those of a subsequent date, says Abbé Lenglet Dufresnoy, are merely copyists of the former writers; while others, in order to deviate from the beaten track, have deemed it necessary to follow the dictates of their own imaginations; "but with regard to myself," continues he,

"I have consulted the historians of the English and the Burgundian party, as the favourable testimony of one enemy outweighs that of a dozen friends."

The authors whom he quotes in the third part of his history, are, Philelfus, an Italian writer, in an epistle which he addressed to Charles VII., about the year 1450; Saint Antonin, archbishop of Florence; Eneas Silvius, raised to the papal chair, in 1458, under the title of Pius II., who speaks of La Pucelle in the fortythird chapter, containing his description of Europe; Baptist Fulgosus, doge of Genoa, in his collection of the most remarkable traits in modern history; Philip of Begarnus, Augustin, in his work De Claris Mulieribus, cap. clvii.; John Nider, the famous German monk, of the Dominican order, who died in 1438, and consequently a cotemporary of La Pucelle, concerning whom he treats in his book De Maleficiis, chap. viii.; Polydore Virgil, the English historian; Hector Boetius, the chronicler of Scottish annals, at book xvi. of his history of that country; Larrey, the historian of England; Paulus Jovius, bishop of Noreras, to the kingdom of Naples; John Ferrier, the Piedmontese, libro xviii. Historie Scotorum ; Jacques Meyer, of Flanders, who speaks of the arrival of La Pucelle at the court of Charles VII., libro xv. Annalium Flandria; Pontus Heuterus, provost of Arnheim, in Guelders; and Mariana, the Spanish Jesuit, who has written an eulogium of La Pucelle in book xx. of his History of Spain.

Freron, in his Année Littéraire for 1754, vol. i., p. 217, in giving an account of the work of Lenglet du Fresnoy en

titled Histoire de Jeanne d'Arc, Vierge, Heroine, et Martyre d'Etat, &c., proposes this question: Was this girl delegated by the Omnipotent to maintain Charles VII. on the throne? or was she only the instrument of a court intrigue, being found capable of counterfeiting the character of an inspired woman, for the purpose of invigorating the courage of the French, and drawing the king from his lethargy? This problem is supposed to be unravelled in a work entitled Histoire de Jeanne d'Arc, &c. After the extract from the work, containing the interrogatories of the judges, and the answers of La Pucelle, the criticism concludes in the following manner:—

"The English had attributed crimes to Jeanne d'Arc, because it was their interest to find her guilty, and it was no less the interest of the French to believe her inspired; is it therefore astonishing that miracles should have been attributed to her? consequently no more credence should be placed in the one than in the other. It must ever remain uncertain whether Jeanne was an instrument delegated by the Supreme Being, and it is more uncertain still whether she had supernatural revelations, on which the author too lightly places dependence, relying upon the veracity of his manuscripts.

"Thus the problem which the Abbé Lenglet had flattered himself he should unravel, continues a problem still, as regards those who cannot come to a decision upon the point in question. Notwithstanding this, the work is extremely interesting and curious, being replete with undoubted anecdotes."

Mémoire sur un Projet qu'avait formé l'Auteur des Mémoires d'Artigny, de donner au Public une Histoire de la Pucelle d'Orléans, composée par Edmond Richer, préface et commencement de cette Histoire.

This production forms the twelfth article of volume the seventh of the Memoirs of Abbé d'Artigny, page 323, Paris, Debure the elder, 1749-1756, in 12mo. 7 vols. We have previously stated, in speaking of the history of Jeanne d'Arc, by Abbé Lenglet, that Debure, the bookseller, had engaged Abbé d'Artigny to consult the manuscript of Richer, upon which the Abbé thus expresses himself:

"I began to work with all the application which the importance of the subject demanded, being no less desirous of satisfying the wish of the public: but, when I learned that Abbé Lenglet was printing an history of La Pucelle, I discontinued my labour. To give, the public some idea of the manner in which Richer handled the subject, I will transcribe the preface and the opening of his history, with such alterations in the style as an editor is warranted in adopting." This forms the subject matter of the Mémoire under review, which certainly gives a favourable idea of Richer's production. Abbé d'Artigny accords him all the justice due to his labour, which is not the case with Abbé Lenglet, who had his motives for disguising the truth.

VOL. II.