MAHMOUD.

_Mahmoud. New-York. Published by Harper and Brothers._

Of this book--its parentage or birth-place--we know nothing beyond

the scanty and equivocal information derivable from the title-page,

and from the brief Advertisement prefixed to the narrative itself.

From the title-page we learn, or rather we do _not_ learn that Harper

and Brothers are the publishers--for although we are informed, in so

many direct words that such is the fact, still we are taught by

experience that, in the bookselling vocabulary of the day, the word

_published_ has too expansive, too variable, and altogether too

convenient a meaning to be worthy of very serious attention. The

volumes before us are, we imagine, (although really without any good

reason for so imagining,) a reprint from a London publication. It is

quite possible, however, that the work is by an American writer, and

now, as it professes to be, for the first time actually published.

From the Advertisement we understand that the book is a combination

of _facts_ derived from private sources; or from personal

observation. We are told that "with the exception of a few of the

inferior characters, and the trifling accessories necessary to blend

the materials, and impart a unity to the rather complex web of the

narrative, the whole may be relied upon as perfectly true."

Be this as it may, we should have read "_Mahmoud_" with far greater

pleasure had we never seen the Anastasius of Mr. Hope. That most

excellent and vivid, (although somewhat immoral) series of Turkish

paintings is still nearly as fresh within our memory as in the days

of perusal. The work left nothing farther to be expected, or even to

be desired, in rich, bold, vigorous, and accurate delineation of the

scenery, characters, manners, and peculiarities of the region to

which its pages were devoted. Nothing less than the consciousness of

superior power could have justified any one in treading in the steps

of Mr. Hope. And, certainly, nothing at all, under any circumstances

whatsoever, could have justified a direct and palpable copy of

Anastasius. Yet Mahmoud is no better.

The southern literary messenger, Vol. II., No. 4, March, 1836 · 第 49 / 51 题