ILLUSTRArED and CONFIRMED. -6y 



which they have now been employed to puzzle, perplex, and 

 obfcure. After all, if the learned veteran had feen Mr FIeyne's 

 ElTay on the Topography of the Iliad*, and Dr Dallaway's 

 late publication, in both of which M. Chevalier is fo ably 

 fupported, I imagine he would have been deterred from publiih- 

 ing his grand fceptical work, notwithftanding the great labour it 

 had coft him. 



Mr Bryant, in the introducflion to his Obfervations, charges 

 the author and his editor with indulging in fevere critical cen- 

 fure againfl Dr Pococke, Mr Wood, Dr Chandler, and Stra- 

 BO. But I can't help thinking that the accufation is too ftrong- 

 ly flated. I hope it was not with an intention to create an early 

 prejudice in the mind of the reader againft the perfons animad- 

 verted upon, and in favour of what was to follow. 



With refpecSl to the firfl of the above-mentioned authors, M. 

 Chevalier had faid, that " his account of Troas, though full 

 *' of errors, and in every refpedl obfcure, yet proved to him a 

 ■*' very ufeful guide in his refearches." (Ch. VI.). He, no doubt, 

 found confiderable obfcurity, and a number of errors, in Dr 

 Pococke's account; and where was the harm in faying fo? But 

 Mr Bryant, in his complaint that Dr Pococke has been un- 

 juftly accufed, does not fubjoin the qualifying claufe of the fen- 

 tence, viz. that " notwithllanding thefe defecfts, the work pro- 

 " ved a very ufeful guide ;" but he referves this latter part of 

 the expreffion, till he find an opportunity of introducing it with 

 more effedl, and more fitly for his own purpofe afterwards. I 

 am not fure if this way of difmembering expreflions, and expo- 

 iing them in disjointed morfels, fhould be confidered as a very 

 fair mode of attack. If M. Chevalier was convinced that Dr 

 Pococke was mifled by Strabo, and regrets that he did not 

 rather " truft to his own obfervation, which probably would 



i 2 " have 



* See Appendix, No. III. 



