A VINDICATION OF HOMER, &c.

IT

is a misfortune attending on all old and established truths, that whilst they are received in the world as matters of general notoriety, or undoubted authority, we are contented to take them upon trust, and, not irrationally, give credit to the opinions of those, who had better opportunities than ourselves to judge of their truth or falfehood. Yet this very circumftance, by which truth extends the frontiers of her empire, greatly weakens her internal powers of defence, and lulled into fecurity by the number of her adherents fhe is too often unprepared to ward off the attacks against her person at home. In the present instance, Mr. BRYANT has afforded us a striking proof of this affertion. The story of the TROJAN WAR rendered immortal by the greatest Poet of Antiquity, was received in early Greece as an historical fact, from thence it has travelled down to us; but it had already been the means of conferring fo much celebrity upon the pen of HOMER, that whilst the historians of all ages recorded the event, the Poets embellished and obfcured a plain tale with every charm of fiction. Relying on this general, if not universal affent, we add our own tacit acquiefcence to an opinion prevalent through a long fucceffion of ages. Sceptics, it is true, have appeared upon this fubject before Mr. Bryant,

Introduction.

HOMER an biftorian."

The little effect which their writings have produced on the opinions of mankind, fhews at least that the facts upon which thofe opinions were founded could not at that time be overturned. A more fuccefsful attack is now made upon them, and it is thought by many, that the claims of Antiquity have been legally fet afide. Let us attempt, however, generously to fupport her titles, and perhaps if we fearch candidly for them, their dusty remains will be found, not much impaired, in the neglected archives of time, and common fenfe. Previous to this however we will examine the arguments by which they have been fuperfeded; fince neither authority nor reasoning can be conclusive, whilft affertions are admitted which impeach the foundations of both. It is necessary therefore to refute the charges now too generally admitted against her, before we can reftore to Antiquity her pristine honours. In my defence of her cause, however, declining all advantage arifing from methodical arrangement, I shall take the arguments of Mr. Bryant in the order in which he has placed them, and following him step by step, will reply to his reasonings as concifely as poffible, referring those who chufe to know more of the controversy to the perufal of his extraordinary publication.

In the opening of his fubject Mr. Bryant begins with a due homage to the genius and writings of Homer. He candidly acknowledges many of the circumstances which have contributed to place him in the rank of an historian as well as a poet, and allows that the characteristicks of the Iliad are feldom to be found in romance or fable." He nevertheless immediately declares his disbelief of the whole ftory, and even of the existence of the far-famed City, the object of the war; which in his opinion was never built in Phrygia.

He

*Mr. BRYANT on the War of Troy, Chap. I. Concerning the excellence of HOMER and his Precision.

TOMER'S Truth or Falsehood, an alternative not indifferent to

He then expreffes a fear that, though "the alternative" may be quite innocent, his going contrary to the popular opinion may BANT. procure him fome ill-will. Whilst I disclaim any ill-will to Mr. Bryant on this account, I cannot help obferving that, notwithftanding this appearance of candor, he does not feem to me to have confidered the alternative with indifference. The reader will judge, whether his statements are always perfectly fair, and if he finds that interpretations are given by him to claffical paffages wholly unwarranted by the context, translations materially differing from their originals, and erroneous tranfcripts from the originals themselves, he will be apt to fmile at the fervour of that zeal which has stepped forward, under the mask of inquiring for literary truth, to defend a favourite Egyptian fystem.

66

Chronological accuracy not effential

historical facts.*

The want of précision in primitive chronology is the first objection brought by Mr. Bryant against the veracity of Homer, repeating to the establishment of therefore once more the articles of his difbelief, he adds, that he adheres firmly to the affertion of Varro, that the Greeks had no certain intelligence before the Olympiads. Cenforinus, however, from whom he quotes, has given the paffage in the following manner: "M. Varro primam Olympiadem terminum ponit inter punov tempus, & hif"toricum." But though we affign the first Olympiad as the æra of accurate chronological history, furely fome events took place before that time, and may be preserved by Homer's works, though we cannot date every portion of the history with the fame precision as we can that of Thucydides. Homer was a poet, and might be an historian without detailing chronology. But the fcepticism which fixes a doubt upon all history prior to the Olympiads, and credits all Grecian history fubfequent to that time, appears to me to draw a line between history and fable, with a precision which can hardly be supported. Homer and Hefiod lived before the

No historical certainty previous to the Olympiads. BRYANT, P. 9.

Olympiads,