us against his image and temple. At this time his idol was broken in pieces, the golden walls which enthrined him laid in ruins; and, in the fubfequent reign of Arcadius, a Chriftian church was erected on the fpot which had been occupied by the temple. "But though the temple, which formed a part of the Serapeum, was thus rafed to the ground, the religious zeal of Theophilus did not prompt him to deftroy the remainder of the edifice. Its fpacious courts and ftately columns ftill continued to be the admiration of the world. This we collect from the Arabic hiftorians, whom we are foon to take for our guides. "In the preceding account, formed from the fcanty materials fupplied by Greek and Roman writers, no attempt has been made to fix the fite of the Serapeum. It is indeed a difficulty which fome writers have acknowledged, and others avoided; and thofe who profefs to decide the question, have been more prodigal of conjecture than of proof. My own fentiments on this fubject I referve for another section. I will close this by requefting the reader's attention to the conduct of the two firft Ptolemys; which it may be ufeful to recollect in the courfe of our future inquiries. For their zealous fupport of men of talents and learning, thefe princes have been defervedly celebrated in every fucceeding age; but in doing this they had affuredly fomething more in view than merely to gratify their tafte for literature, or to obtain a fplendid name among the munificent patrons of art and Icience. There appears at leaft to be an evident and appropriate be nefit, which they were well aware this meafure would confer upon their new kingdom. The fituation of their capital had been happily chofen for the centre of univerfal commerce. But to obtain the full advantage of this great defign, the concurrence and affiftance of the native Egyptians became neceffary: and the introduction of foreign letters and arts would prefent itfelf as an obvious policy, to fubdue their unfocial temper, and to prepare them for that mutual accommodation and general intercourfe, which are required in a commercial people. The fame object would likewife be promoted by a communion of religious wordip: and in this point we may obferve the addrefs of the first Ptolemy in conciliating his new fubjects, and flattering the ancient manners of the country. The admonition to eftablifh Serapis in Egypt was pretended to have been communicated to the monarch in a mysterious dream, which he submitted not to Grecian foothfayers, but to fages of their own nation; and, to enfure to the foreign deity a favourable reception among them, he was made to exchange his Attic titles for an Egyptian name. The temple likewife, which was destined for his abode, feemed to offer a fair occafion to this prince for introducing the architecture of his country to notice and favour. What the diftinguishing feature of this building was, has already been fhewn ; and from its fingular character it is probable, that the founder's defign was to produce a new example of art, in which the genius of each country fhould be happily united, and the native boldness of the Mm 2 Egyptian Egyptian manner combined with the graces and beauties of Grecian elegance." The fifth fection of this work contains a very interefting digreffion relative to the burning of the Alexandrian library, which formed a part of the Serapeum, or that vaft range of magnificent ftructures near the temple of Serapis, on which it conferred its name. On this fubject he oppofes Mr. Gibbons very confident opinion and statement, that no fuch conflagration ever took place; a statement founded on the circumftance of that memorable event not being to be found in the annals of Eutychius, and the Saracenic history of that period by the learned Al Makin. After vindicating the character of Abulpharajus, from the injurious reflections attempted to be thrown upon that hiftorian by Mr. Gibbon, he adds: "The high literary as well as ecclefiaftical rank of this illuftrious primate of the Eaft, and the numerous concurrent teftimonies as well of Mohammedans as Chriflians to the gravity and fanctity of his character, would, in my opinion, even if he were found to ftand fingle in his teftimony, more than overbalance the frivolous cavils of Mr. Gibbon. "But farther, to the negative argument of Mr. Gibbon, I fhall venture to oppofe the pofitive teftimony of the two Arabic hiftorians, both writers of unquestionable authority, and both orthodox profeffors of the Muffulman faith Macrifi and Abdollatif; who not only agree in ftating the fact-the burning of the library, but alfo point out to us the exact spot on which the library ftood. For, after defcribing the column, commonly call ed Pompey's pillar, and mentioning the adjacent ruins of fome ancientedifice, they add, that there was then a library which Amru ebn el Aas burnt by the command of the Khalif Omar."I conclude, therefore, that both the burning, or more ftrictly fpeaking, the defpoiling, of the library by Amru, and its actual fituation, are indifputably ascertained. "A fatisfactory answer having now, I hope, been given to the fceptical infinuation of Mr. Gibbon, I advance a step farther. As the library defpoiled by Amru was a royal library, and as the firft Ptolemaan library was unfortunately burnt by Julius Cæfar, this mult neceffarily have been the fecond Ptolemæan library; and confequently part of the temple of Serapis. We have at length then, by the affiftance of Arabic writers, unexpectedly difcovered the fite of the Serapeum; a difcovery eagerly fought for by the curious for more than a century: and hence arifes one ftrong proof, that a knowledge of Arabic may be made peculiarly fubfervient to the illuftration of Egyptian antiquities. But are there no paffages it may be afked, in Greek or Latin authors, which corroborate the evidence of Arabic writers refpecting the fite of the Serapeum? I anfwer, that certainly there are; though their meaning has hitherto been wholly overlooked, and perhaps would for ever have been lost in obfcurity, had not a ray of light broken in from the caft. Such, however, is the accumulated force of these paffages, when properly confidered, as to leave no room to doubt that the temple of Serapis was contiguous to what is commonly called the pillar of Pompey." Having conducted his readers nal evidence will justify our conclufion, that the æra of the column is to be found in fome point of the Ptolemæan dynafty; for till long after the conquest of Alexander the arts of Greece were not introduced into Egypt. If we confider the fecond monarch of this race, his hiftory, his difpofition, his ability; the connection of a column with a building confeffedly founded by him, and the famenets of the character and materials; if we take each of these circumftances diftin&tly, and weigh their accumulated force; there will be little occafion to hefitate at reftoring the houour of this magnificent monument to Ptolemy Philadelphus; an honour indeed, which cannot juftly be contefted with him by any character in Greek or Roman hiftory, either in remote or later ages. thus far in the investigation, our author, in the final fection, proceeds to state the result of his own conjectures and inquiries. According to his idea the pillar ftood, fupremely eminent above great numbers of others furrounding it, in the middle of the area in the front of Serapeum, whofe lofty columns remained entire after the majeftic pile itfelf, reared upon them, or to which they led, was deftroyed. The remains of the pillars adjoining to it, feen by Pococke, are compofed of the fame materials as its shaft, viz. the durable granite of Egypt. It flood according to Dr. White's Arabic authorities, at the time they wrote, at the northern angle of a vaft building of uncertain antiquity. The Romans, he juftly obferves, would never have expended fuch vast fums of money, as the erection of this column required, or have exhaufted the skill of Greek artifts, to enrich a provincial city; a city too, and a kingdom, whose proudest monuments they were perpetually defpoiling and wafting over the ocean to decorate their own fuperb capital. The argument and final decifion are stated in the fubfequent extract; and the work concludes, as it commenced, with an animated invective against the atrocious invaders of a country, facred to genius and ancient science, which they have deluged with blood, and overwhelmed with defolation. "We are told by thofe who have lately taken its dimenfions, and who in modern ages have had the best opportunity and means of examination, that its principal member, the fhaft, appears to be of Grecian architecture. If then, we exclude the Roman emperors, furely this inter "There yet remains to be mentioned one circumftance in the life of this prince, which will give additional weight to the preceding. conclufion. We are informed by Pliny, that he raifed an obelisk of eighty cubits, as a pledge of his affectionate regard for the memory of Arfinoë. As he exhibited in his capital this fpecimen of Egyp tian architecture, he might with alfo to difplay to his Egyptian fubjects, the architecture of his own country, in its utmoft magnificence, and to fuperadd the decorations of a more graceful proportion and a more appropriate ornament. The obelifk was a naked memorial; but the column was certainly furmounted by the ftatue of him to whofe honour it was erected. "But here we confefs, that we are unable to advance farther than to point out him, who was the likelieft and worthieft to ftand on this unrivaled M m 3 unrivaled column. The gigantic image of Serapis was placed within the temple. The obelisk reared by Philadelphus was a memorial of connubial love. But this monarch was alfo celebrated for piety towards his parents, whofe ftatues he was efpecially careful to multiply and adorn. Whom then can we fuppofe to have occupied this diftinguifhed place before the temple of Serapis, and in the view of the whole city, but him who was the firft monarch of his family, and under whofe aufpices the tutelar deity was introduced into Egypt. "In the courte of this inquiry I have often felt the want of that evidence which might ftill be obtained, were the fire of his renowned temple diligently inveftigated by able men. In the miffion of the national inftitute I entertained a hope, that at least fome better knowledge of Alexandrian antiquities would refult from the invafion of Egypt. But this hope was not more fondly conceived than cruelly difappointed. For except a defeription of the pillar, with a detail of its dimenfions, nothing has been performed, or even attempted. It had been doubted whether the eminence, on which it ftands, be natural or artificial ground: and the judicious Pococke, who noticed certain ruins near it, hinted that they were the remains of fome grand edifice. But these hints have been left unimproved, and thefe doubts fill remain unfatisfied. Profellors of arts and teachers of science have left museums crowded with the fpoils of Florence and Rome-have received the fiat of the great nation to inftruct as well as to fubdue the world-they have vifited this fpot, with power to examine it without moleftation, and certainly with no modeft reluctance to claim the merit of difcovery. Yet what new information, ufeful or curious, have they contributed on this fabject? Certainly none. But whilft the antiquary may regret the opportu nity that has thus ftrangely been loft; whatever the wildom of Divine Providence may have deter mined fhall be its final iffue, every friend of humanity cannot but lament the accumulated mifery, which has hitherto refulted from fo treacherous an enterprise against this devoted country an enterprife, which though it has eventually called forth the moft brilliant and unparalleled exertions of British skill, and valour, and magnanimity: yet has not tempered the horrors of war, and rapine, and massacre, by the production of one fingle advan tage, either to the caufe of literature, or to the ferocious invader himfelf, or to the wretched and unoffending victims of his faithleffness and fury. The appendix is principally defigned for the perufal of the Arabie and Greek fcholar, and contains the moft ample and detailed teftimonies, collected from books and MSS. in thofe languages, in fupport of the statements in the preceding pages. Thefe will not admit of extractor abridgement: what we have already given affords a susficient fpecimen of the work. By the Rev. Henry John Todd, M. A. 8vo. Johnfon, &c. 21. 14s. TH HE labours of the learned were formerly employed almoft exclufively, in illuftrating the claffic writers of Greece and Rome, and little attention was paid to thofe authors of our own country whofe works were not lefs deferving of their care, nor lefs required it. Of late years, the great names which have adorned the literature of our own country have claimed and received the notice of thofe who were beft able to difplay their beauties, to explain their obfcurities and to defend their genuine text from perverfe conjectures and ill-founded objections, Chaucer, Spenfer, ShakIpeare, Ben Jonfon, Beaumont and Fletcher, have already to boaft of the attention of the first names in English literature; and we have now to announce, that Milton is indebted to a new editor, who must be allowed to have done juftice to his author, and to have executed his talk with diligence, with tafte, and with judgement. After pointing out the feveral fources from whence the commentary on Milton has been derived, and acknowledging the affiftance he has received from individuals, Mr. Todd proceeds to give the reader an account of what he is farther to expect in the conduct of the prefent edition. "The chief purpose of the new notes is, in humble imitation of Mr. Warton, to explain the allufions of Milton; to illuftrate or to vindicate his beauties; to point out his imitations both of others and of himfelf; to elucidate his obfolete diction; and, by the adduction and juxta pofition of parallels, univerfally 7 gleaned both from his poetry and profe, to afcertain his favourite words, and to fhew the peculiarities of his phrafeology." Mr. Warton juftly adds, that "among the English poets, thofe readers who truft to preceding commentators will be led to be believe, that Milton imitated Spenfer and Shakefpeare only. But his ftyle, expreffion, and more extenfive combinations of diction, together with many of his thoughts, are alfo to be traced in other English poets, who were either contemporaries or predeceffors, and of whom many are now not commonly known. Nor have his imitations from Spenfer and Shakespeare been hitherto fufficiently noted." Of this it hath been ‘a part of the prefent editor's talk, as it was of Mr. Warton, to produce proofs. The coincidencies of "Fancy's fweeteft children," Spenfet, Shakefpear, and Milton, are accordingly here enlarged. The obligations of our author to Dante, hitherto little noticed, as well as fome other Italian poets, are pointed out. The poet's imitations of himfelf are alfo confiderably augmented. Nor have the romances and fabulous narratives, on which the poetry of Milton is often founded, been neg lected. The editor, while he has not been fparing of claffical illuftration, has conftantly kept in mind the neceffity of attention to the literature of Milton's age. Without this attention, as Mr. Warton remarks," the force of many ftrikingly poetical paffages has been weakened or unperceived, because their origin was unknown, unexplored, or misunderstood. Coeval books, which might clear fuch references, were therefore to be confulted; and a new line of commen M in 4 tary |