ἀλλὰ καὶ οἱ Περσῶν βασιλεῖς εἰ τι χρὴ πιστεύειν τοῖς ὕπερ τούτων ἱστοροῦσι, -Aeliani Variæ Historiæ, Lib. XII.. Cap. 48. [I find from a note in my edition that Dion Chrysostom tells the same story of the Indians in his 53rd Oration.-E. F.]

I trust to be able to show, if permitted to do so, in a future note (1) that the Arian dialects of Dardistan are, at least, contemporaneous with Sanskrit, (2) that the Khajuná is a remnant of a prehistoric language, (3) that certain sculptors followed on Alexander's invasion and taught the natives of India to execute what I first termed "Græco-Buddhistic " sculptures, a term which speciñes a distinct period in history and in the history of Art. G. W. LEITNER."

P.S. in 1893.-The above, which appeared in "the Calcutta Review" of January 1878, is reprinted with reference to Mr. J. W. McCrindle's recent work on "Ancient India: Its Invasion by Alexander the Great," in which he omits to draw attention to the importance of Plutarch's Speech on the civilizing results of Alexander's invasion, and makes no mention whatever of the traces which Greek art has left on the Buddhistic sculptures of the Panjab. He only just mentions Plutarch's speech on page 13 of his otherwise excellent work, published by Messrs. Constable of 14 Parliament Street, London.* As that speech, which is divided into two parts, is, however, of the utmost importance in showing what were believed to be in Plutarch's days the results of Alexander's mission, I think it necessary to quote some of the most prominent passages from it relating to the subject under inquiry. I also propose to show in a monogram, to be published in the Asiatic Quarterly Review, on the græco-buddhistic sculptures, now at the Woking Museum, which I brought from beyond the Panjab frontier, that Alexander introduced not only Greek Art but also Greek mythology into India. I will specially refer to the "Pallas Athene," "the rape of Ganymede," and "the Centaur" in my collection, leaving such sculptures as "Olympian games," "Greek soldiers accompanying Buddhist processions," "the Buddhist Parthenon," [if not also Silanion's "Sappho with the lyre,"]-all executed by Indian artists-to tell their own. tale as to the corroborations in sculpture of passages in ancient Greek and Roman writers relating to the genial assimilation of Eastern with Western culture which the Great Conqueror of the Two Continents, the "Zu'lQarnein" of the Arabs, endeavoured to bring about.

The following passages from Plutarch's speech may, I hope, be read with interest. The author endeavours to answer his question as to whether Alexander owed his success "to his fortune or to his virtue" by showing that he was almost solely indebted to his good qualities:

"The discipline of Alexander . . . oh marvellous philosophy, through which the Indians worship the Greek gods."

"When Alexander had recivilized Asia, they read Homer and the children of the Persians . . . sang the tragedies of Euripides and Sophocles." "Socrates was condemned in Athens because he introduced foreign Gods... but, through Alexander, Bactria and the Caucasus worpropose to review this book in our next issue.-ED.

* We

shipped the Greek Gods." "Few among us, as yet, read the laws of Plato, but myriads of men use, and have used, those of Alexander, the vanquished deeming themselves more fortunate than those who had escaped his arms, for the latter had no one who saved them from the miseries of life, whilst the conqueror had forced the conquered to live happily."

"Plato only wrote one form of Government and not a single man followed it because it was too severe, whereas Alexander founded more than 70 cities among barbarous nations and permeating Asia with Hellenic Institutions. . ." Plutarch makes the conquered say that if they had not been subdued "Egypt would not have had Alexandria nor India Bucephalia," that " Alexander made no distinction between Greek and Barbarian, but considered the virtuous only among either as Greek and the vicious as Barbarian" and that he by "intermarriages and the adaptation of customs and dresses sought to found that union which he considered himself as sent from heaven to bring about as the arbitrator and the reformer of the universe." "Thus do the wise unite Asia and Europe." "By the adoption of (Asiatic) dress, the minds were conciliated." Alexander desired that "One common justice should administer the Republic of the Universe."

"He disseminated Greece and diffused throughout the world justice and peace." Alexander himself announces to the Greeks, "Through me you will know them (the Indians) and they will know you, but I must yet strike coins and stamp the bronze of the barbarians with Greek impressions." The fulfilment of this statement is attested by the Bactrian coins. I submit that he who left his mark on metal did so also on sculpture, as I have endeavoured to show since 1870 when I first called my finds "græcobuddhistic," a term which has, at last, been adopted after much opposition, as descriptive of a period in History and in the history of Art and Religion. [The above quotations are all from the 1st Part of Plutarch's oration; the second is reserved for the proposed monogram.]

G. W. LEITNER.

THE PELASGI AND THEIR MODERN
DESCENDANTS.

(BY THE LATE SIR P. COLQUHOUN AND HIS EXC. THE LATE P. WASSA PASHA.)

(Continued from Vol. IV., page 478.)

THE TROJAN WAR, THE MINE AND THEME OF THE
TRAGEDIANS.

THE Trojan war and its sequels were the great, if not the only, source whence the Attic tragedians drew their inspirations yet it is neither supposed, much less said, that they invented the incidents of which they treat. Where then did they find them? The pictures are those of events occurring after the Trojan siege,-the pars et sequela of that event; and the different principal parties engaged are disposed of, and even their descendants. The deaths of Achilles, Ajax, Agamemnon and Klytemnestra, the Iphigenia in Aulis and Tauris, Electra, the Troades, Andromache, Orestes, and others are all connected with the great historical event. Even where such have not been used, still older and purely mythical incidents are taken, whereof a record, in some shape or other, must have survived, and it is difficult to suppose in any other than a rhythmic form. All these were dramatized myths, or more or less mythic histories, the outline of which was well known to the people at large; and hence the excitement of curiosity and interest, when they were restored to life, in a dramatic form, by poets of acknowledged merit and reputation.

In collecting these stray poems, there are several tales of the revival of the Homeric poems. One is that Lycurgus brought them from Asia to Sparta, 884 B.C.; another that Solon (who died in 558 B.C.) caused the minstrels to recite them in due order; the last that they were collected by Pisistratus, who died 527 B.C. The two former may be safely rejected as most improbable ;-the third remains.

Pisistratus appears to have assembled a commission of competent men, to collect as many of these heroic poems as could be found in any state of completeness, and to reduce them to writing, from the mouths of the reciters.

Those which alluded to the siege of Troy they collected, set apart, and subsequently pieced together, in such a manner as to form something in the shape of an epic. But it is necessary to go somewhat further back, and to trace the derivation of the several members of the great epic. It is elsewhere alleged that Antimachus, who died B.C. 348, reduced them to their present state.

THE ACHILLEID AND OTHER BARDIC POEMS.

Paley suggests, no doubt with truth, that there existed an Achilleid, a Diomedeid-an Ajaxeid, etc.,-the works of the appointed bards of these sceptre-bearing chiefs, and that these were pieced together by Pisistratus' commission, and finally revised by Antimachus. This theory is thoroughly borne out by the internal evidence of the Iliad itself. Judged by the strict rules of art, the Iliad is, in its structure, but an imperfect poem. It has no object to which the poem tends as a whole, and in which it ultimately culminates. It has, in fact, no culmination (dénouement) worthy of the name; for it ends in no great event. Had it concluded with the death of Hector, or been carried on to that of Achilles, it would have been in so far perfect; but it ends tamely in the burial of Hector, and in this respect resembles the Ajax of Sophocles, which it is not impossible that he intended to be an imitation of the Iliad.

The word Rhapsody, or the sewing together of odes, pointedly implies a compilation; and this title is borne out by the contents. These shew it to have been compounded

of

many panegyrics, some of which can be conjectured. The I., IX., XI., part XVI., part XVIII., XIX., XXI., XXII. appear to have been taken from an Achilleid ;-II., IX., XI., part XVI., from an Agamemnoneid or Atreideid; III.,

XVII. from a Menelaieid or Atreideid :-V., X., part XI., from a Diomeid;-VII., XV., Ajaxeid;--VII., X., part XI., from an Odysseid. The rest are uncertain, and might have been independent odes, yet fitting into the general plan laid down by Pisistratus' commissioners, and interwoven with it. It is remarkable that they did not continue the poem to the death of Achilles as the culminating point; but it was probably thought undesirable to wind up an epic with the death of the principal hero.

THE ILIAD.

The story of the Iliad occupies 48 to 50 days, in the 10th year of the siege, and is too well known to need detail.

Professor Geddes, in his article in the Contemporary Review (1877), points out several discrepancies in the Iliad, which incline him to adopt the view that it was made up of various materials. He differs, however, in thinking that Books I to VII., and XXIII. and XXIV., formed a part of the supposed Achilleid, while the remaining 13 were portions of other heroic poems interwoven or inserted between these two points his reason is that Achilles is referred to as the leading character in these. But on reference to the foregoing pages, this hardly seems correct, Achilles taking no part in Books II., III., IV., V., VI., or VII., while he reappears in Books IX., XI., XVI., and XVIII. The Professor, however, does not go the length of supposing other panegyric poems; but remarks on the absence of the unity of the poems, though the Odyssey culminates in a great event. Like his predecessors, however, he maintains the Iliad to be the older poem. He appears to be incorrect also in asserting the 24th Book to be part of the Achilleid, and that the climax is reached in the 22nd Book with the death of Hector. His own arguments, however, though strong fail to persuade the Professor that the poem consists of isolated bardic songs, collated and strung together at a subsequent age a view strongly supported by the ETуpapai, according to which the action of the Iliad occupied 48 days: