This ample quotation will enable our readers fully to enter into the plan of M. CLAVIER; and, as we have already stated some important objections to it at the beginning of this article, we shall not interrupt the favourable specimen of the execution of that plan which we here subjoin, by any farther criticisms:

The

As the epoch of the taking of Troy is one of the most important in antient history, (because, before the commencement of the Olympiads, events were dated only according to the number of years by which they preceded or followed this siege,) I believe that I ought to make a digression in order to determine this epoch, on which authors vary, even as to centuries. They generally agree that the Dorians conquered Peloponnesus eighty years after the taking of Troy ; and we shall soon see that this calculation appears to be well founded. Dorians divided their conquests in Peloponnesus into three states, in each of which was established a branch of the Heraclidæ. We have not an exact list of the descendants of Temenus: but we know that Phidon and Caranus descended from him in the tenth generation; we have the succession of the Heraclide who reigned in Sparta, on one side down to Cleomenes, who was killed 218 years B. C.; on the other, down to Agis son of Eudamidas, who died 240 years before the Christian æra. We have that of the kings of Messenia down to Euphaes, who witnessed in his reign the commencement of the Messenian war; and, lastly, that of the kings of Arcadia, until Aristoerates II., who betrayed the Messenians in their second war against the Lacedæ monians. All these genealogies, with some others, on which we shall soon treat, ought to give us nearly the epoch of the conquest of Troy.

The first war of Messene commenced, according to Pausanias and Eusebius, in the second year of the 9th Olympiad, 743 years B. C. Alcamenes and Theopompus were then kings of Lacedæmon, who descended in the ninth generation from Euristhenes and Procles; Euphaes, who then reigned in Messene, descended equally from Cresphontes in the 9th generation; lastly, Achmis, king of Arcadia, during whose reign commenced the first Messenian war, descended also in the 9th generation from Cypselus, who gave his daughter in marriage to Cresphontes when he entered Peloponnesus; it is, then, impossible to admit of more than nine generations between the invasion of the Dorians and the beginning of the Messenian wa Still are they not complete, since Euphaes only ascended the throne when this war commenced: but, supposing that they were perfect, and calculating, as is usual, three generations to a century*, we shall find 300 years, which, added to the 80 that passed from the destruc tion of Troy to the invasion of the Dorians, and to 743 from the commencement of the war of Messene down to our æra, make 1123 years.

*Herodotus. B. 2. 142. This calculation is true in general, and if there be any exceptions to it, they are rather below than above it; that is to say, it may happen that three generations do not fill p a century, but it rarely happens that they exceed it.'

. On

On the other hand, Cleomenes descended from Eurysthenes at the 24th generation: he was killed 218 years B. C. If we join this number of years to the Soo which the 24 generations give us, and to the 80 of which I have spoken, we shall have 1098 years. Agis, who was killed about 240 years before Christ, descended from Procles in the twenty-third generation, which makes 766 years; and these, added to the 80 and to the 240, make 1086 years. I well know that Freret and Larcher, who has followed him in this opinion, suppose, from a passage of the Politics of Aristotle, that the kings of Sparta married only in their 37th year; and they, consequently, fix to that period the duration of each generation: but there is no proof that Aristotle had the kings of Sparta in view; and as the Lacedæmonians very much feared to see the race of the Heraclida extinguished among them, (to whom they believed the fate of their republic was attached) we may suppose that the kings married rather before than after their 30th year. These calculations are supported by many other genealogists. Archelaus, king of Macedon, and contemporary with Euripides, descended from Temenus in the eighteenth generation; which makes 6co years. He was killed 398 years B. C. Now these two numbers, joined to the 80 which transpired between the taking of Troy and the return of the Heraclidæ, form 1078 years. Lastly, Miltiades, who founded a state in the Chersonesus, descended, according to Pherecydes +, in the 17th generation, from Ajax, son of Telamon. He founded this state about 560 years before the Christian æra; which, with the 566 years which the seventeenth generation give us, make 1126 years. I could multiply proofs, but here are sufficient, I think, to demonstrate that we can put back the taking of Troy only 110c years beyond our æra. am well aware that the opinions of many antient authors will be quoted against me ‡, and, among others, that of Eratosthenes; one of the first who employed himself in forming a regular chronology:

* Here is a calculation which proves the supposition of Freret to be false. Cleomenes was killed 525 years after the commencement of the first Messenian war. He descended from Alcamenes (under whom it began) in the sixteenth generation, which forms 533 years. Agis was killed 503 years after the same epoch: he descended from Theopompus at the fifteenth generation, which makes 500 years. Since we find nearly three generations in a century, during the times which we know accurately, by means of the Olympiads, we may presume that such was also the case in those which preceded their ara.'

Marcellinus, Life of Thucydides, p. 1. The copyists have forgotten in this passage the name of Eurysaces, son of Ajax and father of Philæus; and that of Cypselus, father of Miltiades.'

We may see all these opinions collected with much care by M. Larcher, in the chronology of Herodotus, p. 358. We shall perceive that almost all these authors wished to determine nearly to a year the period of taking of Troy, which is absurd; the calculations by genealogies can only give such approximation. I do not consider myself obliged to confute them, because it appears to me difficult for them to refute those positions which I establish.'

but,

but, as I have already observed, they had no exact dates before the fixed establishment of the Olympiads, and they only founded their calculations on genealogies. Now if those which I am about to report are exact, (as there are many grounds for presuming,) Eratosthenes must be deceived; he has, in truth, placed too long an interval between the return of the Heraclidæ and the commencement of the Olympiads; for he calculates that period at 327 years*, when in fact it is not more than 260, as we shall see in the sequel, which makes a difference at once of 67 years. We must feel that, after all, this method can give us only calculations which approach to the truth: but those which I have adopted appear to me to be the best founded, and I shall have, as I proceed, many opportunities of confirming them.'

We had also translated for quotation a passage in the second volume, relating to the disputed era of the first institution of the Olympiads: but our limits will not allow of its insertion.

Besides the genealogical calculations, and other discussions of an equally unamusing but useful nature, with which M. CLAVIER has filled the principal part of both his volumes, he favours us, towards the conclusion of the last, with some modest apologies for the Pisistratidæ, and indeed for many others of the great characters who have been so scandalously denominated tyrants in the page of history; which apologies, we can readily conceive, are likely to be as serviceable to their author as they are entertaining to his readers. M. CLAVIER, it will be remembered, is a judge in the court of Criminal Justice at Paris; and M. Combes-Dounous, whose Platonic reveries and poli tical audacities we lately criticized, (see App. to Vols. 62. & 63.) was an ex-legislator. We need say no more on the subject. The latter, probably, was out of the reach of offended power, when he called despotism by its proper name; and the former, certainly, is not that patriot

"qui libera posset

Verba animi proferre, et vitam impendere vero."

We have only a word more in the tone of censure to address to this author. He observes a difference between two Christian writers in settling the Mosaic chronology; - one of them following the Hebrew original, the other adopting the Greek translation. He follows Plato, and fancies that he may have the same licence! They dispute about what Moses said. He erects Plato's authority against that of Moses, and begs to be considered as orthodox!-We must not, however, take our leave of M. CLAVIER, without expressing our high sense of his extensive learning and industrious research.

Clement of Alexandria, Stromatis, Book 1. p.402.'

ART.

ART. II. Lettres sur la Grece, &c. i. e. Letters on Greece, the Hellespont, and Constantinople. By A. L. CASTELLAN. With 20 Views, taken and engraved by the Author, and two Plans. 8vo. in Two Parts. pp. 171 and 235. Paris. 1811. Imported by De Boffe. Price 148.

THE THE author of this volume is already known in French literature by his Letters on the Morea, which display the eye of a civil engineer, rather than the classical reminiscences of a travelling scholar. M. CASTELLAN draws tolerably well, and engraves his own sketches, twenty of which accompany this publication: but they more often respect the prominent features of modern landscape, than spots which are dear to fame, or consecrated by the mouldering remains of antiquity. The present letters on the Hellespont and on Constantinople form in fact a continuation of the tour already published, and have the same merits and defects. It may be surmised that the author was required by the French government to examine routes by which armies might pass, to make charts of coasts which transports would have to approach, and to sketch fortresses in districts to which ambition contemplated hostile excursions. The delineations of military posts are no doubt silently deposited in the Parisian office for foreign affairs; and the author has been encouraged to publish that exoteric information, which prepares the soldier to volunteer, and the public mind to accompany a projected expedition. It was under the pretext of superintending the construction of a naval dock, that M. CASTELLAN was introduced to the Turkish government by the French ambassador.

The shores of the Hellespont have often been visited by classic tourists, who have in some instances too much neglected to furnish us with a picture of things in their present state; who have described these districts, not as if they carried their eyes but their libraries in their heads; and who have preferred the researches of erudition to the labours of observation. M. CASTELLAN is not a traveller of this kind; and, though he consults his Noel's Mythological Dictionary for anecdotes which poetry has, associated with his scenery, he does not republish all Anacharsis, but narrates chiefly his own personal experience. Any portion of archaiology which may be found in the book is very superficial, and is, we believe, foisted in by the editor M. Dufourny, who cultivates antient geography, and is a member of the Institute. Though the author, however, is not learned, he is a man of good sense, an artisan, (should we say?) or an artist of considerable professional merit, a scientific ship-carpenter, whose habitual labors have drawn

his attention to mathematical rather than to classical acquire ments, and who can better discuss the merits of a building, or a mill, than those of a bust or an inscription.

The picture of Gallipoli in the third letter possesses novelty and vivacity :

• Arrived before Gallipoli, we cast anchor at the southern extremity of the town, which is the most accessible part; higher up the canal, are loose rocks, (rochers eboulés,) rocks which have tumbled down from a high shore. Our boat landed at a little wooden bridge, at the opposite extremity of which stands the custom-house, where we were received with the usual precautions. We then walked over the city it is still vast: but the ruins, which cover within it large unoccupied spaces, shew that it was formerly much more populous. Few of the antique monuments are well preserved: but fragments of marble, architecturally sculptured, every where abound. Most of the galleries which surround the houses are propped on marble columus now inverted, the capitals having been employed as bases. Above a gateway is remarked a key-stone representing a colossal horse's head. A high square tower is connected with the antient fortifications, which seems to have been built in great haste, since it includes numberless fragments of edifices, mingled without order, and entire columns placed horizontally among layers of

other stones.

The bazars of Gallipoli are extensive, furnished with wares of every kind, and kept with exquisite neatness. These sheltered markets are divided into numerous streets, in each of which a distinct class of merchants exhibit their goods. The doors of the shops open horizontally; the upper half lifts into an inclined shade, or blind; and the lower half becomes a sort of counter, on which various merchandise is spread for inspection. The streets are covered with canvas, or with a trellis interlaced with palm-leaves, of which the chequered shade is welcome and picturesque.

In one of the streets are all the goldsmiths, who expose trinkets, jewelry, filligree, and larger pieces of plate, which are less remarkable for taste of form than for the profusion of chasing and decoration.— In another street are the cordwainers, whose shops have a strikingly singular and agreeable appearance. Festoons of short boots, made of yellow or red or green morocco, and glittering with an embroidery of gold and silver thread, of pearls and of precious stones, hang in parallel curves from the architrave; while slippers perfumed with musk, lined with ermine, and magnificently stitched, are arranged in gaudy mosaic on the counter. Europe has no idea of the luxury and beauty of these shoe-makers' shops. In a third street are those of the druggists, or perfumers; which, though less captivating to the eye, take the passenger prisoner by the nose. The great variety of scents, which the Turks use, all exhale at once from these shops with incessant competition, so as to overcome the odour of the pipes which are lighted there. The tobacco of Lataki and Salonica is sold in the leaf in prepared packets, and shredded or cut at home. It is of a light and yellowy fillemot color, and is far preferable for its mildness and

aromatic