130 
plan made ufe of by the flaff-officers of 
the army of Egypt, more correct and ex- 
tenfive than that of Danville, is novel and 
highly interefting in all refpects, 
Antiquities. —The antiquities comprizé 
two parts 5 the one treats of medals, and 
the portraits of Alexander j and the other 
of arms and warlike machines. . 
In the firft; the author examines this 
queltion; on which the learned have been 
much divided—Have the traits of Alex- 
ander been tran{mitted down tous? He 
declares for the affirmative; grounding 
his opinion on the diflertation of Eckhel, 
ef which he gives a tranflation, and on 
the authority of the celebrated M. Vifcon- 
ti, who has comminicated to him a very 
luminous notice on the fubjects ; 
Hiftorical Critique.—It is chiefly in this 
point of view that this new tranflation of, 
Arrian merits eulogium. ‘The author has 
profited by materials of every kind, ana- 
lyfing every thing that has been written 
relative to Alexander, fo as. to eftablith a 
fort of concordance from among the dif- 
ferent hiftorians. This part, likewife, 
comprehends a review of the ancient 
and modern hiftorians of Alexander. 
And, laftly, the Hiftory of Arrian coms 
mencing at the reign of Alexander, it was 
indifpenfable to. prefix an hiftorical intros 
duétion to it, which the new tranflator has 
done. He treats fummarily of the politi- 
cal fituation of Greece, of Macedonia, of 
Philip, _ of the occafion and of the mo- 
tives of the war againft the Perfians, and, 
lafily, of the firft years of Alexander. 
Here the ftyle of the tran flator, which 
in ail the reft of the work is modelled by 
the fimplicity of that of Arrian,rifes and dif- 
plays the ardour which is peculiar to him, 
‘« Philip created his own elevation, that 
of Macedonia, and even the grandeur of 
Alexander, 
<¢ Macedonia had no military and marine 
eftabiifhments; it was without money,with- 
out allies. He conftruéted ports, opened 
mines, formed the phalanx, conquered or 
purchafed allies. 
‘* He prepared the fubdjugation of 
Greece by the fame means as Cexfar after- 
wards employed to opprefs Rome. It was 
in Thrace and Ilyricum that he forged 
chains for Athens. 
‘© His ambition was feed in the 
right feafon; his plans, matured by 
an impenetrable policy, were only un- 
folded @ propos, and always unexpeci- 
edly; his prudence had flowly pre- 
pared what his valour executed with 
impetuofity. 
‘¢ Jt is a beautiful trait of his glory to 
Monument at Carnac: 
Match ly 
lave futmounted profperity itfelf; whicki 
ruined Alexander. Every day was repeated 
to the king, by his order, at his awaking. 
Remember, that thou art a man! ; 
«© We find Ulyffes in Phi ilip, as Achilleg 
in Alexander: However; when heroifm 
was in accordance with his intereft, Philip 
fhews him(elf the’ pupil of Epaminondas. 
<< Eftablithed forms, always of fuch 
influence, become in his hands fo many 
fecret fprings and fnares. Invefted with 
power to fend deptities to the Amphyéty- 
onic Council and_ to prefide at the Pythic 
Games; he accuftom’ the Greeks to con- 
fider him as their arbiter. Then it is that 
his fkilful tyranny divides and corrupts 
all the republics, agitated by his intriguess 
or fhaken by his arms. 
“‘ His policy confifts in detaching thé 
one from the other ;1n cherifhing and fup- 
porting rivalfhips. At one time he fhews 
himfelf a protector, at another an op- 
preflor: : 
«¢ The pi&ture of Demofihenes Roppings 
hy the force of his eloquence, the torrent 
ready to overwhelm the feeble ruins of li- 
berty, on which the orator alone ftands 
erect, would be the moft beautiful {pecta- 
cle af this age, if the death of Phocion 
were not the grandeft ! 1”? &¢. 
— 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIRs 
HE obliging anfwer of Monanders 
(in your Magazine, Vol. xiv. p.397) 
and his interefting account of the Carnac 
and other antiquities in Bretagne, demand 
my grateful thanks. Unfortunately we 
do not poffefs any complete vocabulary of 
ancient phrafes ; and without it, or a very 
general acknowledgment and definition 
of terms, we fhall be ever fubject to erro- 
neous conclufions. This is particularly 
the cafe refpeéting words that are com- 
monly applied to Druidical remains. Thus. 
Monander calls a large heap of ftonesadbar- 
row, and to a monument fimilar to Kits _ 
Coity Houfe, in Kent, he has not given a 
name; though, by his defcription, it 1s 
evidently a Cromlech. The Welfh cha- 
raclerife the former by the name of Carz 
(Cairne, or Carneth) ; and it feems very 
probable that the village of Carnec de- 
rived its name from this etymon. There 
are feveral villages and placesin Wales 
and Cornwall defignated with this word, 
having different terminations. 
The extraordinary monument at Carnac 
is fingularly difiimilar to any remaining in 
England, and to all others that I have 
ever heard of ; for it feems to be formed 
more 
