Viserat, aut gelidas Pœnus superaverat Alpes. Senserat hujus opem, et moerenti dulce levamen, Senserat hunc, socium curarum, heu! non ita quondam Nunc tamen et solio penitùs concussa vetusto Quid memorem, Angliacis quantas stipata carinis Nec minimos felix victoria fudit honores, Ista coarctabat constricto limite sedes! Nam neque quâ fugerent data porta, neque ulla salutis Desuper horrificis pendens immurmurat iris. Quid facerent? quà tanto ausint discrimine rerum Vertier? hinc premit ægra fames, hinc ferrea cuspis Stat minitans mortem, cædis præsaga futuræ. Plurima tum lethi ante oculos feralis imago Transvolitat miserorum, et pallida volvit Erinnys Purpuream frontem, et fœdatos sanguine crines. Jamque dies horrenda aderat: tormenta parari, Magnaque vis armorum et plurima machina Martis. Continuò effusi telis rutilantibus ignes, Et totam immensis quassantia molibus urbem Acta fragore novo, et tristi concussa tumultu Quin verò hæc inter felicis gaudia palmæ, Sic homini abripitur spes omnis, et inscia vanis Tuque adeò, tantâ de cæde egressa superstes, Et patriæ testata decus, laudemque tuorum, REMARKS ON THE EXISTENCE OF TROY. TO THE EDITOR OF THE CLASSICAL JOURNAL. SIR, INROLLED under the banners of Bryant, and protected, as he seems to think, by that name, your correspondent Brent has attempted to rekindle that controversy which once inflamed the literary world. The task Mr. Bryant had undertaken was difficult, and new. To persuade men, that they had for ages given credence to what was a mere poetical fiction; to induce them at once to shake off those prejudices, endeared to them by early associations; and without endangering their reliance on historical testimony, to prove, what had all along been considered as a historical event, immortalised by the poet, who records it, untrue; was an attempt fit only for the ingenuity, the learning, and the authority of Bryant.-But able men often indulge in idle speculations, of which their very genius is the cause: it leads them to despise the common road, to find out a path untrod before, and when they perceive the semblance of reality, to pursue it with so much eagerness and vigor, that at last they think they have found the substance, when in fact they have only got the shadow. -Dat inania verba ; Dat sine mente sonum, gressusque effingit euntis. Such, without meaning to detract from Mr. Bryant's merit, is my opinion of his share in this controversy, and, although Brent has roundly asserted, that his arguments remain unanswered, there are few besides himself, I am convinced, who after reading Mr. Morritt's paper would join him in that assertion; a paper, which displays as much research and learning, as ingenuity and ability in argument. I am far from wishing to prevent inquiry into any subject, the legitimate discussion of which might tend to improvement, in science, or to farther discovery: but I disapprove that restlessness of mind, which seizes with avidity every new theory, and will rather rake up the embers of expiring controversy, and fill the world anew with useless contention, than for a moment allow itself to remain inactive. With how much more advantage to mankind, and to himself, might that learning and time have been employed, that Mr. Bryant devoted to the consideration and discussion of a question, which, however curious in itself, as ascertaining the degree of credit to be bestowed on early writers, is of no more consequence to the elucidation of history, than if he had attempted to prove that the Myrmidons of Achilles were not in reality sprung from ants. As it was brought before the public, it would have been no small reproach to the classical lovers of antiquity, if they had allowed such an attack upon their choicest veteran to pass unnoticed and unanswered. Mr. Morritt accordingly appeared, in "vindication of Homer, and of the ancient poets, and historians, who have recorded the siege and fall of Troy." Mr. Bryant replied, and from that time the controversy slept, till Brent in your last number again brought it forward. On the arguments which he has used, I now beg leave to make the following observations. Brent begins, following the footsteps of Mr. Bryant, by urging "the strong improbability that the states of Greece, in that rude and helpless state of society, should have been able to collect, equip, transport, and maintain abroad, for so many years, an armament exceeding in force any that they could draw together several centuries afterwards, on far more momentous occasions."-It is impossible to reason speculatively on such a subject: as, at first view, this argument appears almost convincing. Its plausibility, however, is materially lessened upon a closer inspection, and when tried by the test of historical experience, it is totally overthrown. For we have many instances in later periods, of barbarians far more rude and savage, than we have any reason to believe the Grecians were at the time of the Trojan war, emanating from the Northern regions, and pouring down in multitudes which astonished mankind, upon the more fertile countries in the South. Nor are we to be told, that these swarms issued from territories more extensive, or from states more populous than Greece; the fact being, in a certain degree, directly the reverse. For that part of Northern Germany, and of Gaul, possessed by the tribes who at different times attacked the Roman Empire, was overrun with forests and morasses so immense, that their remains are visible even at the present day the extent of habitable land must therefore necessarily have been very small; and, if the Cimbri and Teutones, single tribes of Germany, could, whilst in that state of barbarity, collect such numerous armies; why are we to think that Greece, one of the most fertile and luxuriant countries in the world, was not able, by her greatest efforts, to bring into the field 100,000 men? Besides, the increase of population in countries as far south as Greece, is in a degree of nearly six to one, greater than that in the north of Europe; and allowing a little for poetical licence, it is neither incredible nor improbable, that at a period, when every man's profession was arms, such an army might be collected. Thucydides, on whose authority great reliance may be placed, tells us, that it was within the bounds of probability, though he adds, a poet would go to the utmost of current reports.-Lib. I. cap. 10. The equipment of this armament will not, upon consideration, appear to have been so great an exertion of national prosperity as Brent thinks it. The fleet consisted of about 1200 open vessels, containing from 50 to 120 men each,' and every vessel must have been in requisition, to transport the army. The Grecians were, from their situation, naturally obliged to turn their attention to naval affairs, as well to protect themselves from the attacks of foreign foes, as to carry on the commerce they had with the Phoenician and other nations; and the constant piratical expeditious which they undertook against one another, and against the islands in the Ægean Sea, a mode of warfare as honorable then, as it was common, were all circumstances, which conspired to render the equipment of this force a most easy task, perfectly reconcileable with our information as to the early ages of Greece. This would account for the size of the armament; but Brent does not conceive it possible, that a fleet of 1200 ships should, "at that period of civilization, have been procured," as "several centuries afterwards, when the Greeks were exposed to inevitable destruction, unless averted by the most vigorous resistance, their whole united fleet, after a long preparation, amounted only to 378 ships." Now this is not at all a fair statement, for although there is a great numerical difference, yet when the size of the ships, and the number of men they contained, is considered, the difference in value will scarcely appear. The ships used at the Trojan war were of every description collected to serve as transports, and held very few men. But in the other case, they were ships of war, gallies used only in battle, all of which had as their complement 160 rowers, and from 40 to 50 soldiers :3 taking therefore, at an average, each ship to hold 200 men, which is less than the real number, the numbers of men at the battle of Salamis, to which Mr. Brent alludes, will stand thus: There was also a land army which fought soon after at Platea, amounting to Making in all, an armed force of -----185,600 men. And this immense force, it must be remembered, was drawn not from the whole of Greece, but from parts of it only; For Herodotus says, Lib. XI. cap. 31. that there were about 50,000 Greeks or Macedon 'Homer. Iliad. Lib. II. |