The major (in page 679) computes that a day's fail among the ancients did not exceed thirty-five miles. On this and other occafions, he mentions the voyage of Nearchus without even a hint that the learned and refpectable Dr. Vincent has written one word on the fubject; and the tranflator of Hanno's voyage is only once mentioned. Thefe circumstances feem to favour of a monopolifing fpirit, and to imply that the major's greatness is not only fuper-eminent, but folitary; and that, as Pope faid of Addifon, he wishes to ftifle his brethren and reign alone. On the fubject of the voyage of Hanno, we expected that the major would have ufed the work of Goffelin, which he might have procured a twelvemonth before his own work made its appearance. On this and other occafions we have ftill deeply to regret the major's want of bibliographical knowledge. In treating of Babylon, he borrows his account of Beauchamp's difcoveries from an English magazine, apologifing for his ignorance where the originals can be found, while they first appeared, if we mistake not, in the Journal des Savans, and were thence transcribed into that common journal, the Efprit des Journaux. As we have the advantage of poffeffing Goffelin's work, we fhall take the opportunity of giving a curfory collation of his fentiments on the fubject. Goffelin fuppofes that the voyage of Hanno did not extend beyond Cape Non; and he infers that the ifland of Cerné is now Fedal. Major Rennell, on the contrary, fuppofes that the fouthern Horn, or termination of the voyage of Hanno, was Sherborough Sound! Non noftrum eft tantas componere lites. We have little doubt that Goffelin has too much restricted the voyage of Hanno; and perhaps major Rennell has extended the courfe too far; but, of the two opinions, we prefer the latter. In difcuffing the inland geography of the ancients, for inftance that of Scythia, it is fafe and proper to reftrict the boundaries; but this obfervation cannot be equally applied to maritime difcoveries, in which a fhip may pafs from one headland to another without any knowledge of intermediate regions. The major infers that the island of Cerné is that now termed Arguin near Cape Blanco; yet Ptolemy places it midway between the Strait of Gibraltar and the Canary Islands. The major fupposes that Madeira is the Pea of Ptolemy; and, if fo, Cerné must have. been one of the Canary Iflands. It is probable that Ptolemy, as well as more modern geographers, fometimes put down the fame object under different names, and fometimes in one latititude, fometimes in another, juft as he happened to calculate the day's fail or the day's journey. That geographer might alfo confound intelligence of remote periods, and depofit on his maps in a mathematical form the fame ifland or the fame region under different names and with different longitudes and latitudes. But this fubject would require a differtation, and we have already exceeded our propofed limits. We fhall therefore conclude with a few remarks on this last section, that there may be no occafion to return to this particular subject in a future article. When the major obferves (p. 729), that, if Cerné was only five ftadia in circumference, it could not have admitted a city and colony, he certainly forgets Tyre. The islands in the Gulf of Biffago (p. 730) can hardly be identified with the fingle large ifland mentioned in Hanno's voyage, rendered remarkable and easily diftinguished by a lake of falt water. When the major proceeds in the next page to explain this away by alluvial changes, he only fhows that the difficulty is very great; and when we learn from his note (p. 734) that the general maps of Africa err feveral degrees of longitude in the extent of the Guinea coaft, we have the lefs occafion to wonder at any ancient errors. His opinion, that the Horns of Hanno were bays or inlets and not promontories, as has been always fuppofed both in ancient and modern times, we shall not defend, but muft rather deplore his deficiency of knowledge in the learned languages. Of Bougainville he obferves that his judgement appears to have forfaken him en❤ tirely; but the fubject is fo full of difficulties, that any rigid cenfure cannot juftly be applied even to the groffeft mistakes which may arife in its illuftration. (To be continued.) Effays on the Picturefque, as compared with the Sublime and the Beautiful; and, on the Ufe of ftudying Pictures, for the Purpofe of improving real Landscape. By Uvedale Price, Efq. Vol. II. 800. Ls. Boards. Robfon. WE have often noticed Mr. Price's peculiar doctrines, and examined the first volume of thefe effays in our XXIIId (N. A. p. 426). We thought we perceived a more conciliating manner in the letter to Mr. Repton, intended as a fupplement to the effays, and hoped for a little favour for the trimmed lawn and unbroken banks; but Mr. Price starts again into his former doctrines, and retains with rigour every part of his own fyftem. Our readers will recollect, that this author opposes the doc trine and practice of Brown, in giving to grounds of every kind the fameness and monotony derived from an exquifite polish; contending, that the picturesque requires management of a different kind-the ragged borders of the lake, the wreathed roots of an aged tree, the high-banked lane, the lines fharpened by abrupt finuofities. In objection to this we obferved, that the fcene at home is ufually expected to be adorned with greater neatnefs; that there we feek repose; that the irregularities which the picturesque requires fatigue the eye and ruffle the pleafing calm which we expect near our habitations. Having premifed thefe leading points, which are applicable to the author's doctrines and our opinions in this article, we will follow the elegant and ingenious effays in a line as fmoothly flowing as Mr. Brown himfelf could have devifed, and as diftant from the fharp returns, the picturesque poignancy of criticifin, as even Mr. Price could with. The firft effay is on artificial water. It is truly excellent, and may be read with advantage even by a follower of Mr. Brown. In fact, a lake must always be in fome degree artificial; for it must be at least kept to an uniform level, and the rival fyftems will differ only with refpect to the outline, whether it fhould be fmoothly polished or left in its natural ruggedness. The broken rock, the half-discovered antique root, &c. certainly depend on the nature of the furrounding scenery; and our author, when he speaks of thefe in fuch general terms, falls into as great an error as his antagonist, who would clump a foreft and polith a mountain. Yet Mr. Price's ideas of adorning the ufual smooth regularity of these artificial lakes, under fome restrictions, are very ingenious. It may be objected to the ftyle I have recommended, that, from the aukward attempts at picturefque effect, fuch fantastic works would often be produced, as might force us to regret even the present monotony. I have no doubt, that very diverting performances in roots, stones, and rock-work, would be produced, and that alone I should reckon as no little gain; for who would not prefer an abfurd, but laughable farce, to a flat infipid piece of five acts? There is, however, another very effential difference. In a made river there is fuch an incorrigible dulnefs, that unless the banks themselves be totally altered, the most judicious planting will not entirely get the better of it: but let the moft whimsical im prover make banks with roots, ftones, rocks, grottos, caverns, of every odd and fantastic form, even these, by means of trees, bushes, trailing plants, and of vegetation in general, may in a fhort time have their abfurdities in a great degree disguised, and ftill under that disguise, be the cause of many varied and striking effects: how much more fo, if the fame materials were difpofed by a skilful artist! There are, indeed, fuch advantages arifing from the moisture and vegetation which generally attend the near banks of water, that even quarry ftones fimply placed against a bank, however crude their first appearance, foon become picturefque; moffes and weathere ftains (the certain confequence of moisture), foon enrich and diverfify their furface, while plants of different kinds fpring forth between their feparations, and crawl and hang over them in various directions. If ftones thus placed upright like a wall, nay if a wall itself, may by means of fuch accompaniments haye an effect, what an infinite number of pleafing and ftriking combinations might be made, were an improver, with the eye of a painter, to search for ftones of fuch forms and tints as he could employ to most advantage! were he at the fame time, likewife to avail himfself of fome of thofe beautiful, but lefs common flowering and climbing plants, which in general are only planted in borders, or against walls! we fee what rich mixtures are formed on rocky banks, by common heaths and furze alone, or with the addition of wild rofes and wood-bines; what new combinations might then be made in many places with the Virginia creeper, periploca, trailing arbutus, &c. which though, perhaps, not more beautiful, would have a new and more dressed appearance! Many of the choice American plants of low growth, and which love shade, such as kalmeas, and rhododendrons, by having the mould they moft delight in placed to the north, on that fort of fhelf which is often seen between a lower and an upper ledge of rocks, would be as likely to flourish as in a garden and it may here be remarked, that when plants are placed in new fituations, with new accompaniments, half hanging over one mass of stone, and backed by another, or by a mixture of rock, foil, and wild vegetation, they affume so new a character, such a novelty and brilliancy in their appearance, as can hardly be conceived by those who only fee them in a fhrubbery, or a botanical garden. In warmer aspects, especially in the more fouthern parts of England, bignonias, paffion-flowers, &c. might often grow luxuriantly amidst similar accompaniments; these we have always feen nailed against walls, and have but little idea of their effect, or even of that of vines and jeffamines, when loosely hanging over rocks, and stones, or over the dark coves which might be made among P. 46. : them.' In the management of water, as leading the eye to beautiful objects, and concealing those lefs pleafing to which the attention would be otherwife led, as well as in the management of a natural river, Mr. Price difplays an accurate and refined taste. But, in the banks of his artificial water, he fill wishes to leave the little angles, the miniature bays and promontories, the fringe of rushes or of plants, which, we think, give the appearance of careleffnefs and neglect. We muft ftill recur to our original principle, that, at home, all should be ornamented and polished, but, at a distance, more wild and picturesque in every country the garden fcenery is opposed to that around; and, when inclosures were comparatively few, our garden plots were divided by ftraight lines. Thefe now furround us, and of course we arrange our gardens dif ferently.. On the whole, with the exception of our author's principle, his hobby-horfe, which he often rides with little mercy, we have been highly pleafed with this effay. We before noticed fome of his digreffions fcattered in the notes. They are more numerous than in the former volume, and they are often highly interesting. We thall felect one which has much pleafed us. An unexpected excurfus of this kind varies the fcenery, and renders our author's picturefque ideas still more entertaining. • All that part of the fable which relates to the form and position of the Cyclops' eye, is by many fuppofed to have been invented fince the time of Homer: it is certain that he is perfectly filent with refpect to them both. Some of his moft diligent interpreters have alfo thought that he never intended to reprefent Polyphemus as having been originally of a different formation from other men, but merely as having loft an eye by fome accident; and at Catanea, in Sicily, there is a fculpture in relief, which does reprefent him according to this idea. I muft own, that notwithstanding these authorities, I am ftill inclined to think, that Homer did mean to reprefent the Cyclops in general, as a one-eyed race by nature, whatever may have been his notion of the form and pofition of that one eye. There is a paffage in Strabo which clearly proves that he was of that opinion: fpeaking of Homer's mixing truth with falfehood, he fays, that he probably borrowed т85 μovoμars, xunλwñas, from the history of the Arimafpians. I lately, alfo, heard an obfervation which ftrongly influenced my opinion. At the time I was writing this note, I mentioned the fubject of it in company with fome friends of mine, very much verfed in all claffical learning. One of them, whofe words in public and private have fuch weight, that the flighteft of them are recollected, faid, he was perfuaded that Polyphemus never had more than one eye; for if he had ever had two, Homer would not have omitted telling us how he had loft one of them. This remark, though flightly thrown out, ftruck me as containing great juftness of obfervation, and great knowledge of Homer's character. But though Homer is filent as to the form and position of the eye, both thefe circumftances, as likewife the etymology of the name, Cyclops, are mentioned with remarkable exactnefs in the Theogony; a poem afcribed to Heûod, but which, I believe, is generally thought to be posterior both to him or Homer. • Μουνος δ' οφθαλμος μεσσῳ επέκειτο μετωπω Euripides, who has written a whole play on the fubject of the |