Mr Chevalier quickly perceived the neceflity of getting rid of this notion, as it was incompatible with his hypothefis. He therefore ftrenuously contended, that the Greek prepofition rigi ought in this inftance to be tranflated near, befide, hard-hy. We confefs we were astonished to find that Mr Bryant fo eafily abandoned this point. The question is, whether Homer ever ufes the prepofition wig before the accufative cafe in any other sense than as fignifying round, or about? These words are often employed in our own language, without a strict attention to their original meaning and proper fignification. We fpeak of the gardens round London, without thereby understanding, that London is quite encircled by gardens; and we discourse about many things, without thinking of the primary meaning of the word about, which we take to have been originally fynonymous with around. In Greek, the prepofitione is often ufed with the fame inattention to its rigid and proper fenfe. Thus, igi rein gar, about the third hourπερὶ ἑβδομήκοντα ναῖς, about feventy tips τα περὶ ἐμε, the things which belong to memo περὶ Σωκράτην, thore about Socratesπερὶ καλὰ ῥέεθρα, about the beautiful ftreams-égi rixos, about the wall. But after allowing all this latitude of fenfe to the prepofition, there ftill can be no doubt, that, before the accufative cafe, it generally fignifies round, and especially when employed in any local defcription. We will even venture to affert, that it must be fo understood, except where the fenfe neceffarily limits the meaning. When Homer fays, τὰ περὶ καλὰ ῥέεθρα άλις ποταμοίο πεφύκει,

we immediately perceive that its full force cannot be given to the prepofition, becaufe, ftrictly speaking, the trees and plants could not grow round the river. Neither, when he fays,

πάνη γὰς περὶ τεῖχος ορώρει θεσπιδαὲς πᾶς,

can we literally understandig to fignify round, fince the wall ran in a long line, and the fire was only on the fide of the wall next the plain; but when no fuch difficulty exifts, then its full meaning must be given to the prepofition. Mr Dalzel, in his learned note, obferves, that agrigi so ought to be tranflated fighting about, or near the city. But if Troy were built in a plain, as Homer fays it was, there is no impropriety in fuppofing, that the hoftile armies were engaged in different divifions, on all fides of the city. Hector fays, Let the facred heralds proclaim, that the youth arrived at the age of puberty, and the old men hoary with time, keep watch round the city, on the godbuilt towers. ** In this place, wig äsu can fignify neither about, nor near, the city; but must bear the interpretation which we have given it. Why, however, could not Hector have been fa

tisfied

tisfied with having the walls guarded, which were next the plain, if Troy had ftood on the hill of Bournabachi, and if the Greeks had always fought before, and never round Ilium? When Andromache fo pathetically deplores her fate, in cafe fhe fhould be carried a captive into Greece, the adds, and then fometimes there will be fome one who fhall fay, as he beholds me weeping, This was the wife of Hector, who was the most diftinguished warrior among the Trojan tamers of horfes, when they fought round Ilium.' "Ole "Xov aμpeμaxorro. Achilles in the ninth book expreffes himfelf not lefs clearly,

Ει μέν τ' αὖθι μενων Τρωων πολιν αμφιμάχωμαι,

Ωλείο μέν μοι νοσος, &c.

From all these circumstances, we are still inclined to think that Homer meant to use the prepofition gì in its common fignification before the accufative cafe, when he repeated it no lefs thanfive times in fpeaking of Hector's flight round the walls of Troy. If our limits allowed us, we could quote various teftimonies to prove, that this was the fenfe in which he was understood by the ancients; and we cannot reject fo much evidence, merely that the travellers may have a difficulty the lefs in perfuading their readers that they have discovered the fite of Ilium on the hill of Bournabachi. Mr Gell, indeed, is pleased to allege, that Virgil must have understood Homer in the fenfe for which he contends; because, in a paffage which is evidently copied from that now under confideration, he makes Turnus run in a circular direction before the walls, and not round them. We fhall not stop to difpute this point with him; becaufe, whether Virgil believed that Hector fled thrice round the walls or not, he certainly believed that his body was dragged thrice round them, which is exactly the fame thing in relation to the prefent argument.

Ter circum Iliacos raptaverat Hectora muros.'

But perhaps Mr Gell is ready to fhow that circum does not properly fignify around, any more than wigi.

Till we took up Mr Gell's book, we will confefs we had neither read or feen any thing which could lead us to believe that there still existed any remains of ancient Troy: and recollected, without any emotions of scepticism, the lamentation which attefted its complete deftruction nearly two thousand years ago-jam feges eft, ubi Troja fuit; and etiam periere ruina. Mr Gell, however, was almoft perfuaded that he found fome of the original marbles of Troy. He difcovered the remnant of a tower of confiderable dimenfions, and the vestiges of the wall which encircled the acropolis: fuch veftiges, he adds, may be found on almost every fide of the Pergama. That there are veftiges of buildings, is undeniable; but from what data Mr Gell thought himfelf entitled to

$ 3

afcribe

ascribe them to fo remote an antiquity, we do not pretend to underftand. In the mean time, we will venture to put a few questions to him, which we hope he will refolve in the next edition of his work. How happened it that Alexander fought for Troy among the fields, and not on the fummit of the hill called Bournabachi by the Turks? How came it that the Macedonian hero was not led by these traces, which are so diftinct in our days, to build upon this fpot? Is it not rather ftrange that Cæfar could not difcover the veftiges which were fo obvious to Mr Gell? Why did Lucan fay, that even the very ruins were deftroyed? Is it not extraordinary that Heftiæa Alexandrina, a learned lady, who wrote concerning Troy, and who was a native of Troas, fhould have known nothing of these remains of the ancient Ilium? For what purpose did Demetrius of Scepfis inform Strabo, that no trace was preferved of the ancient city? We do not doubt that Mr Gell found all the veftiges of which he speaks, old marbles, and capitals of the Ionic order turned upfide down in the walls of the Aga's houfe; but we certainly doubt as little, that the ruins on the hill of Bournabachi belonged to fome of those numerous cities which, according to Strabo, were rebuilt after the Trojan war.

On the fummit of the hill, Mr Gell tells us he found the tumulus of Hector, which confifts of a large conic heap of ftones, apparently thrown together without any order or regularity, and on the top of it is a fmall patch of earth producing long grafs and weeds. When Cæfar vifited the Troad, and happened carelessly to walk among fome long grafs, a native of Phrygia forbade him to tread on the afhes of Hector.

Securus in alto

Gramine ponebat greffus; Phryx incola manes

Hectoreos calcare vetat..

Who then can doubt that our traveller has difcovered the very fpot where Cæfar trod, and where Hector lay? The long grafs ftill grows on the tomb; though Mr Gell, with an eye attentive to the effects of time and nature, obferved that, when he was there, the herbs were withered! There are other evidences, however, ftill more infallible. Paufanias relates, that the Thebans were directed by an oracle to carry the afhes of Hector to Thebes. Our traveller found fome faint traces of an opening having been made in the tumulus; and this, he thinks, is probably the teftimony of their religious obedience. How fortunate a coincidence of circunftances for Mr Gell!!! But this gentleman's good luck in making difcoveries can only be equalled by his fagacity in feeking for them. He not only finds the tombs of

men,

P. 92.

† P. 95

men, who died before the existence of any certain history-he not only fhows the marsh, where Ulyffes paffed the night above three thousand years ago-but he remarks, that the ground near the gardens feems to have preserved in fome degree the fame appearance as in the time of Homer, who obferved that there was a fallow field in this fituation. Papa! Who fhall now deny that Troy stood on the hill of Bournabachi?

To be ferious, however, we conceive that the tomb of Hector, upon which Mr Gell has made fo exulting a stand for his theory, is among the most formidable of the ftumbling-blocks that have fallen in his way. It confifts of fmall ftones no doubt; and this is the fole proof of its identity. What if Homer thould give no authority for fuppofing that the tumulus of Hector confifted of any thing but earth? The lines in the last book are, Αίψα δ ̓ ἄρ ̓ ἐς κοίλην κάπετον θέσαν· αὐτὰς ὑπερθε

Πυκνοῖσιν λάεσσι κατεσόρεσαν μεγάλοισι,

દે

Ρίμφα δὲ σῆμ' ἔχειν.

From which paffage we conceive it is quite plain, that the body was laid in a grave, and covered with a number of great ftones, after which the earth was heaped over it. Mr Gell, after Mr Chevalier, chufes to understand a number of great stones, '-' a great number of fmall ftones:' whereas it is obvious that the large ftones were placed to protect the body from the preffure of the earth, the heaping up of which is fpecified as a feparate operation; and no mention whatever is made of fuch a pile of. fmall loofe ftones as occur in the tumulus of Bournabachi. us, indeed, it did not appear that there is any reafon for confidering this heap as fepulchral at all. It rather occurred to us, that as the hill was formerly cultivated, thefe ftones had been collected together for the purpofe of clearing the ground; a circumftance which is rendered more probable from the existence of feveral other heaps, though of lefs magnitude, on the adjoining parts of the hill.

To

It has been the practice of almost every nation, at fome period of their history, to raife mounds of earth over the dead and as we learn from Strabo, that the Myfians and Phrygians were accuftomed to erect fuch monuments, it certainly cannot appear wonderful that these tumuli, as they are called, fhould be more frequent in Alia Minor, than on the continent of European Greece; or that they fhould be found in confiderable numbers in the Troad, which appears, by the remains of feveral towns, to have been formerly fo well inhabited. With all these facilities, we acknowledge we are rather furprised that Mr Gell has fucceeded fo ill in identifying a felection of thefe barrows with the monuments of Homer's heroes. Two of thefe mounds, however, fituate near the mouth of the Mendere Sou, have been pointed out by him

as the tombs of Achilles and Patroclus: their vicinity to each other, is the only poffible foundation of fuch a fuppofition; for, in other refpects, nothing can differ more from Homer's defcription. In the account which Agamemnon gives to Achilles, in the xxivth Book of the Odyffey, of the funeral rites with which he had been honoured by the Greeks, he defcribes the tomb as large, fituated on a promontory, and vifible from afar.

Αμφ' αυτοῖσι, δέπειτα μέγαν καὶ αμύμονα τύμβου,

Χέυαμεν Αργείων ιερος κρατὸς ἀιχμητάων,

̓Ακτη ἐπὶ προχέση, ἐπὶ πλατε Ἕλλησπόντω.

Now, thefe tombs are at fome diftance from the fea, and per fectly on a level with it: it is, moreover, a fact, that a perfon unacquainted with the hiftory of the Trojan war, although he would be ftruck with the appearance of feveral other mounds, might very easily leave these unnoticed, in failing at an inconfiderable diftance from the coaft. This is perfectly incompatible, we conceive, with what we are made to believe concerning the great magnitude and confpicuous fituation of the tomb of Achilles.

The larger of thefe mounds was opened fome years fince, by the order of M. de Choifeul, the French ambaffador at the Porte; and its contents afforded, to many, an additional proof of its identity with the fepulchre of Achilles. A fmall bronze ftatue, and fragments of earthen vafes were difcovered in it; but Mr Chevalier's reprefentation of the figure, (if we may believe the artist who firft difcovered that it was a figure, and not the point of a lance), is extremely incorrect; and from an authentic caft which we have feen, made by this fame artist, there can be no doubt that by the manner of the drapery, and general flyle of the work, it is not to be referred to a period of higher antiquity, than when the country was under the dominion of the Romans. But even if this tomb were more ancient, and if, for the fake of argument, we fuppofe it to be the fame, round which Alexander danced ftark-naked in his frenzy; there is no reafon why we should not conclude that he was equally mistaken as in the fituation of the city, which certainly was an object of greater notoriety.

The afhes of Antilochus, we learn from Homer, were placed in the fame tomb with those of Achilles and Patroclus; but we do not find any mention of a tumulus or cenotaph being raised in his honour. At the distance of more than a mile from those just mentioned, is a mound moft confpicuously placed on a promontory, and which is indeed a land-mark to failors far out at fea : this, Mr Chevalier and Mr Gell have been pleased to denominate the tomb of Antilochus; but with a ftill lefs degree of probabili ty; for if any tomb had been erected to his memory, it would doubtlefs have been near that of Achilles, in which his remains

were