120 
readily imagined that this labour was re- 
plete with great dificulties, but it has not 
been without its rewerd. He who would 
inform himfelf of what has been the pro- 
grefs of the art of hiftory among the 
Greeks, ought to ftudy the enormous re- 
Jiques of a ‘number of loft works with 
which the field of antient hiftory is co- 
vered. An acquaintance with the monu- 
ments that are either wholly or half pre- 
ferved, can give no idea of it. Notwith- 
ftanding, even with this preparatory labour, 
we cannot always expect to afcertain the 
fources from which Juftin has borrowed. 
There are certain sah on which we can 
pronounce nothing : fume of his materials 
may be referred to aint probability, fome 
others with certainty; and, upon the 
whole, the author conceives that he has 
not miffed of his aim. 
The fix firft books ferve for an intro- 
yay They ccntain, down to the time 
f Philip of Macedon, the hiftory of the 
‘AG atic nations, and Greeks, that were.af- 
terwards Ree by the Macedonians. 
For the whole of thefe books, Theopom- 
pus, in his Philippics and -his Hellenics, 
has been the eae. authority. That 
hiforian had made it his bufinefs to inter- 
alate throughout his work the primitive 
iitory = the fates and nations of which 
etreats ; Trogus did the fame; and fo 
far as the “ee of Theopompus extends, 
we may be fure that ail fuch fort ef di- 
ane Py 
grefiens in- Troguvs ate herrowed” from 
his predeceffor. As the whole of that 
part of the hittory is oniv compofed of fa- 
bles, we ought not to sipcdacls Trogus 
For std ing ad lapted them ; he was net ‘the 
firit, be only copied othe:s, and his hiftory 
in the hiforical ; period is net the lefs wor- 
Eny of credit. 
The bh ftory of Macedon, which is con- 
os to the. eee of the tenth bock, name- 
ly, to the death of Philiv, commences with 
the feventh book. This. was the princi- 
pal fubjcct of Theopompus 3 and we may 
clearly difcern, as well from a view of the 
whole narrative, as from a number of de- 
tached portions, that Trogus was cniy a 
copyilt of Theepompus. [It isthe fame 
ee! refpeét to that part of the hiftory 
which relates to the Periians that were 
caniemporary, and which is intercalated 
with the other parts. 
The eleventh and twelfth hooks contain 
the hificry of Alexinder. We know not 
wiiar authority Trogus has followed here ; 
th s, however, is a matter of indiffcrence, 
as *hefe notices only contain what is very 
well known. . Afterwards come the times 
of Aicxanders’s fucceflors. Thefe times 
On the Authenticity of Trogus Pompe'us and Fuftin. {| Sept. 1 
are not witheut a number of hiftorians, 
whe defcribed the exploits of thofe princes 
and of their polterity ; moft of them are 
eafily chara&terized, particularly from 
their partiality to fuch or fuch a prince ; 
which alfo points out the fource from 
which Juftin has borrowed in certain parts 
of his narrative. ‘ 
The hiftory of. the twenty-one frft 
years, to the death of Caflander,(293 years 
before the vulgar zra,) is related in the 
tweilth to the fifteenth bocks; but fo 
-briefiy, andin a manner fo defe€tive, that. 
cannot divine what author Trogus has 
followed. The epifode on the origin of 
Cyrene is probably of Theopompus ; that 
of the Indies from Megafthenes. The 
digreffion upon Heraclea is likewife from 
Fheopompus. 
In the feventeenth bock, the partiality 
of the author for Seleucus againit Lyfima- 
chus proves that hehas here: followed Hiero- 
nymus of Cardia, who probably has been fo 
far his guide in a number of places. The 
digreffion on the antient hiftory of Epi- 
rus is, likewile, borrowed from Thico- 
pompus, and is introduced on occafion of 
the wars of Pyrrhus in Italy. Trogus 
intercalates a long epifode on the hitlory 
of the firt times of Carthage, (which we 
are enly acquainted with from him,) and 
on that of many Greek cities im Italy ; 
and herelates the hiftory of Syracufe from 
thetime of Dionyfius: allthisis from The- 
oponipus. Only when Theopompns fails 
him, Trogus has recourfe to Timeus ; fo 
that it is not always very ealy to dillin- 
guifh which beléngs to the one or to the 
other. But it is alfuredly from Timaus 
that the hiltory of Agathocles is related : 
we may difcern it ciearly in the fhaded 
portrait which he exhibits of that extra- 
ordinary prince. In the hiltory of Pyr- 
ae this fame writer was his guide ; and 
in the other events related in the twenty- 
frei to the twenty-ninth seein, parti- 
cularly in the diflentions between the Mas 
cedonians, the Achaians, and the Spar- 
tans, he has fojlowei Phylatcus, as ap- 
p-ars frem his partiality for Cleomenes. 
The following books, the thirtieth to the 
thuty-fifth, contain the period defcribed 
by Peclybius, end there is no reaion -to 
queftion but that he has borrowed-from 
that author. It is more diffcult, butalfo 
much more important, to know the auiho- 
tities from which he has borrowed the cons 
tents of the books thirty-fix to forty-: wo. 
Thefe books are, at prefent, the principal 
fources for many of the, mo& ee. 
paflages of antient hiftory, cipecialiy for 
i la& periods of the hiftory of Syria ; 
"Mee 
