mer-himself an episode between poetry and history, on the confines of the monumental and written annals of mankind-we would again suggest to any reader who may hesitate assent to inferences which add the dry character of an arithmetician and chronologist to the more delightful one of the poet, the necessity he is under of otherwise accounting for the extraordinary coincidences of the receding Egyptian calendar of the year with the Trojan and Homeric epochs, as fixed by history; the corresponding agreement of the times of action of the Iliad and Odyssey, which point to a common calendarian source of computation; and the consistency of the whole with the character of these poems, and with their asserted and most probable origin. We are, however, far from insisting that our reasoning may not be improved upon, as the subject is a novel and untried one. To any who would assume the coincidences which we have adduced to be mere accidents, we have no reply to make: while we flatter ourselves there are few impartial readers, whether Egyptians or Grecians, who will not agree that we have, in this outline, done something towards fix B. c. 1269, to 1069. On the same error the date of Crates, and the higher date of Eusebius would appear to be grounded. The former states, that Homer wrote before the return of the Heraclidæ to Greece-an event which, with Thucydides and the best authorities, he dates eighty years after the taking of Troy. This opinion demands some attention in connexion with a modern hypothesis. Mitford conceives, that as Homer does not allude to so important an event as that which expelled the Pelopidan dynasties, whose exploits he celebrates, he probably wrote before its occurrence; and he (Mitford) thence takes occasion to lower the Trojan era to within eighty years of the time of Homer, as fixed by Herodotus, or to the commencement of the ninth century B. C., in agreement with the hypothesis of Newton. But, had the poet alluded to so recent an occurrence in Grecian history, it would have destroyed the consistency of statements intended for the edification of his countrymen. It would be as if a modern English writer mixed up the accession of the house of Stewart or of Brunswick with the heroic age of King Arthur. Homer might make a poetical use of the distant history of Egypt; but he could not do so with the reigning dynasties of Greece, without making his history ridiculous. Mitford also infers with Newton (Chronology, p. 61), principally because the father of Oxylus the first Heraclid king of Elis, and the father or grandfather of Iphitus, the restorer of the Olympiads, had the same name—| -Hæmon,-that Iphitus was probably the grandson of Oxylus; and on such grounds reduces the interval between the return of the Heraclide and the first Olympiad, B. c. 776, from nearly three centuries and a half, to half a century. But there are several errors in this statement. Iphitus was not the founder of the established Olympian era, but celebrated discontinued Olympiads 108 years earlier, as already shown from Eratosthenes and Phlegon; and the collateral genealogies of the Heraclid kings of Lacedæmon, Corinth, Macedon, &c., are well preserved. Caraunus, the first king of Macedon, who reigned в. c. 812, is agreed to have been the seventh from Temenus, the first Heraclid king of Argos. We believe we should not have thought Mitford s objections to the established age of the Trojan war worth noticing, had they not been advocated by an acute and able Egyptologist. Mr Sharpe, in his " Early History of Egypt," in support of Mitford, prefers the incomplete genealogy of Pythagoras as stated by Pausanias, to the established descents of the Heraclid kings of Greece, preserved by the same writer, and rendered indispensable by the Parian chronicle,-supporting his views by the age of Thuoris and Proteus, nearly as we have stated it, and that of the foundation of Carthage-points which we have shown to be alone explicable, and reconcilable with ancient testimony, by the receding Egyptian calendar of Homer. Were the hypothesis of Mitford valid, its effect would be, with Crates, to raise the age of Homer to the end of the twelfth century B. c, but not to alter the well established era of the Heraclid dynasties, nor that of the Trojan war which preceded it. Had the ancients left us no express statements on these questions, speculation would be justifiable: but, as it is, our business should be to reconcile, and not to replace the profuse evidence of antiquity; and that this may be effected in a manner equally simple and convincing, we trust we have fully proved. Let it also be remarked, that, admitting the same Hæmon to have been the father of Oxylus and Iphitus, or even the grandfather of the latterthe utmost latitude the hypothesis admits, the effect would be to bring the return of the Heraclide to the era of the Olympiads, and thus to make history ridiculous. ing the authorities, principles, and age of the Homeric writings; and towards restoring their author to that place which is due to him, as the father of profane history as well as of poetry; as the oldest historian of the series which we hope to display in full relief in another Egyptian article; and, as a chronologist who acquired his information in the same school from which Manetho and Hipparchus drew theirs, and who consequently raises the most complete scientific system of time that has ever been propounded, six and seven centuries earlier than the ages to which it has hitherto been traced. Such are the results of our attempt, which more immediately address themselves to the antiquarian and historical reader; while the poetical and classical reader will, we trust, be equally struck with the bearing of our numerical arguments on the questions of the unity of Homer and his writings, and the completeness of the latter as they have descended to us in the Iliad and Odyssey. For, it will be agreed that the coincidences in the times of action, and the elements which connect them with the annual calendar, are altogether irreconcilable with the hypothesis which supposes these productions to be collections of rhapsodies by different individuals of the mythic age, which were afterwards put together and arranged in their present form and equally irreconcilable with the rejection of any material portion of them, on the grounds of what is termed "the primary argument," or for any other reason. Thus, if with the German critic Wolf, we reject the last six books of the Iliad, as an excrescence unconnected with "the wrath of Achilles," because, coming after his reconciliation with Agamemnon, we reject not only the heroic actions of Achilles, but the general action of twenty-eight days, or of exactly half the time into which the events of that poem are distributed, and destroy the coincidence with the action of the Odyssey; while, if with other critics we only throw overboard the twenty-fourth Iliad, as unnecessary to the main object of that poem, the action of twenty-four days is relinquished, and the effects are nearly the same. But, although the whole may be unnecessary to "the wrath of Achilles,"† it is strictly so to "the will of Jupiter and the gods," which is chronologically measured by the coinciding times of the Iliad and Odyssey, and the calendarian festivals on which these times are founded, and thus numerically demonstrated to be the true primary argument of both poems. It follows, that, whatever interpola tions or extraneous matter the critie may detect in these wonderful productions as they have descended to us, we possess them complete, and as they were originally written and arranged, so far as regards the general plan and substance; while we have numerical proofs of unity in the composer, not only as regards each, but both of them, in accordance with the unity of purpose flowing from the true primary argument which it was the poet's object to develope. It is almost needless to add that the Egyptian source of Homer's materials, and his alleged and necessary visit to that country, supplies a very efficient answer to those who would object to the Homeric compositions being by a single individual, on the grounds of the impossibility of committing such lengthened and complicated produc tions to memory, in an age when writing materials were unknown in Greece. The papyrus of the Egyptians long anticipated the parchment of the Greeks, and we have written examples of the reign of Ramses II. the poets' Memnon. *This disproportionately long interval (which includes twelve days, during which the body of Hector remained in the tent of Achilles, and twelve more for the truce allowed for interment), compared with that of three days assigned to the burial of Patroclus, 1. xxiii.) would appear added by the poet to fill up the prescribed calendarian time of action. † Or, more properly," the sulkiness of Achilles," of whom we know little as a hero till after the 18th book. Can we suppose that Homer ever intended that the hero of the Iliad should be outshone in valour by Hector, Diomedes, and many others of his dramatis persona? NEW DISCOVERY-ENGRAVING, AND BURNET'S CARTOONS. WE WELL recollect many years ago hearing a letter read before the Society at the Adelphi, from a tailor in St Martin's Lane, in which he boasted of an invention to make pictures by patches of cloth. The importance he attached to his scheme was amusing, but more so from the manner in which he insinuated the inconvenience of all other processes of picture making, for his invention was "to supersede the necessity of painting in oil." The Royal Academy has still persevered in oil, and to show their contempt of the tailor and "Rag Fair," have assumed an extraordinary finery; and the purple patch has been adopted without extraneous aid, and so effectually daubed on, as to "supersede the necessity" of being stitched on by the Knight Templar. "Purpureus late qui splendeat unus et alter Assuitur pannus." Since the tailor's failure to " supersede," many have been the inventions to promote arts. A lady has discovered that the old masters did not, after all, paint in oil, but saturated their works with it afterwards, though some of them, before that theory was born, had painted themselves at their easels, and exhibited their cups and brushes, of which, according to her account, there was not the slightest necessity. Still the Royal Academy are obstinate, and artists will perseveringly entitle themselves "painters in oil and water colours." The art has a little coquetted with encaustic painting, and there have been serious proposals of reviving fresco: while all these great revolutions of art in posse" are in contemplation, innumerable are the contrivances in "esse," to render colouring so brilliant, that, if much further progress be made this way, the sun himself will not be able to look at them, and the dilettanti will labour under universal ophthalmia. The "modesty of nature" has been discovered to be a cheat, a coinage of the brain. Varnish predominates painters crack of their pictures, and their pictures will, in a few years, crack of themselves. But let invention go on, and when it shall happily drive varnishes out of the field, and with it some absurdities and monstrosities, British artists may acquire a lasting fame. While genius is at one time playing the capriccio with discoveries, and at another time goes to sleep, hoping to awake to new and more perfect ones; invention is still busy, and despairing of the permaneney of the works themselves, takes pains to make the transcripts of them as multiplied as possible. Great have been the "improvements" in the art of engraving, and in imitation of engraving. First came Lowry's diamond points-then the sky rulers, shade rulers, and substitution of machinery for the hand. Much more has consequently been done in all that concerns effects and tones; but it must be confessed that this has been attained not without great sacrifice-a sacrifice of that which is, after all, the chief beauty, that free and inexplicable execution, which is, as it were, the sign manual of genius. The handling of the etcher, such as is visible in the works of Wood, Mason, Vivares, men whose merits have been strangely overlooked, is now never seen. our own part, we would forego all the advantages gained, for the recovery of the old "needle work" which showed so well the mind of the painter; it gave a transcript of the spirit, more than of the tones. But these "improvements" have reflected themselves, as it were, back upon painting; for now artists, seeing the power of the graver's tools, have become themselves mechanical, and fleece and smoke, velvet and tin, represent or misrepresent, flesh, drapery, air, land, water, and trees. The citybred and city-inhabiting population, who take their ideas of external nature from our annuals, where white satin buildings, variously shaded, as it were, with cigar smoke, stand for towns, and masses of soot for woods and forests, sent off into proper distance by the most approved jet blacking, must be truly astonished, if they have not already lost their eyes and capability of taste, when they go out to look at nature herself. It is true the steam-boilers by sea and rail-road, may for a while deceive them into a For belief that all is right, but they must be unfortunate indeed, if they do not leave the low levels of the "sooty Acheron." The substitution of steel for copper, the power of multiplying plates as before we did impressions, was another wonderful stride; and with it came a fear that the public would die of a plethora of taste, when good engravings might be sold for little more than the cost of paper, and plates be renewed, ad libitum, for ever.-"Exegi monumentum ære perennius" verified to the letter. We know not how it is, but just as we are going to have something good in this world, up starts a mischief to mar it or to vilify it. There is not a real panacea, but has its rival. Engraving, set upon so firm a basis, one would have thought might have been supreme. No such thingher illegitimate sister, Lithography, sets up her claim, and by means of cheap publications, calls in the masses, who naturally prefer the inferior article; and here commences the democracy of art. Print shops have increased out of number-print auctions are every where; so that, if all the world do not become judges of art, it cannot be for lack of means to make them acquainted with it. It is somewhat, perhaps, to be feared, that art itself will be held cheap, when all its productions are so; and that the bad will outsell the good. Great, certainly, are the powers of lithography, but it affords a fearful facility of setting forth abundant mediocrity, and engendering bad taste, and ultimately disgust. Few better specimens of lithography are to be seen than those of the Dresden Gallery, yet, in comparison with steel and copper plates, how unsatisfactory are they! We have omitted to speak of Mezzotinto, which has been likewise greatly improved the cheap "gems of art supplied the public with some very beautiful things; in these, the fault of mezzotinto, the opaque blackness, was much remedied, and a transparency given to the shades and reflected lights very gratifying to the eye. It is, however, better adapted to subjects of deep tones than of light; and in those extraordinary illumination fails. It is a pity this method was adopted for the engraving the beautiful subject of Salvator Rosa's Jacob's Dream. The picture is too light for it, the bold clouds that require outline (more VOL. XLV. NO. CCLXXXI, particularly as suitable to the free execution of Salvator), inundated as they are with preternatural, with heavenly light, bearing their radiation from the very seat of Divine intelligence, look in mezzotint as if emitted from a manufactory furnace, and the angels appear as if they came out with the smoky volumes. In the picture, the whole ground, not dark, is evidently high and under a clear atmosphere, and, besides, seems in some degree itself pierced by the heavenly vision. But the print is altogether too dark, and yet the contrast with the high lights does not give brilliancy. We are sorry to say this in the teeth of a most able engraver; and who, after all, if he has failed in giving the full beauty of the original, has yet added to the public stock a good and valuable print. We wish to see that picture and its companion, as they were exhibited at the British Gallery, Pall Mall, well etched and engraved to see the needle and the graver throw out the bold execution of Salvator Rosa's hand. The character he has thus given to the clouds is very important; they communicate with the angels ascending and descending; they allure them and accompany them in their heavenly and earthly mission. Here ends our digression on this particular specimen of mezzotint. There is no breathing space-all is one great movement. Where are we going? Who can tell? The phantasmagoria of inventions passes rapidly before us are we to see them no more?-are they to be obliterated? Is the hand of man to be altogether stayed in his work? -as the wit active the fingers idle? Wonderful wonder of wonders!! Vanish aqua-tints and mezzotints chimneys that consume their own smoke, devour yourselves. Steel engravers, copper engravers, and etchers, drink up your aquafortis and die! There is an end of your black art— "Othello's occupation is no more." The real black art of true magic arises and cries avaunt. All nature shall paint herself— fields, rivers, trees, houses, plains, mountains, cities, shall all paint themselves at a bidding, and at a few moments' notice. Towns will no longer have any representatives but themselves. Invention says it. It has found out the one thing new under the sun; that, by virtue of the sun's patent, all nature, animate and inani 2 B |