S28 
For the Monihly, Magazines 
OBSERVATIONS on the UTILITY of CLAS84 
SIFICATION 02 ENGRAVED STONES, 
HE numerous monuments in all kinds 
which have been preferved and 
tran{mitted to ts from antiquity, prove 
fufficiently what ufe the ancient artifts 
knew how to draw froin the hiftory of the 
- war af Troy, fung by Homer, and by 
fo many other poets. The rape of the Pal- 
ladium is one of the events which has been 
reprefented the-moft frequently ; and in a 
sanner the moft uniform, in almioft all the 
different monuments. Inthe Catalogue of 
Taffie, appears a lift of feverity-eight 
antique engraved ftones which repre- 
fent this fubjeét: but this lift is not 
ihtirely complete. This family of en- 
gtaved ftones is nota little remarkable, 
whether we have regard to the beauty of 
the ftones, which thé ancient artifts felec- 
ted, to reprefent this fubject, gr whether 
we juftly eftimate that fort of emulation 
whichappears to have predoininated in the 
ancient artifis, who devoted themfelves to 
this fubjeét, and which furnifhes an op- 
portunity of making interefting obferva- 
tions on the more or lefs, either of origi- 
nality, or of the genius of imitation, by 
which thofe artilts were animated, 
An antique bronze found in the Marche 
ef Brandenburg, and the fubje& of which 
relates to the rape of the Palladium, has 
operated as an inducement to M. Con- 
RaD Levezow, Public Profeffor in the 
Royal Gymnafium of Frederic William, 
at Berlin, to collect and arrange fome 
facts and obfervations, the refults of 
which are configned to the prefs in an ex- 
cellent differtation lately publifiied by him, 
on this point of archeology. 
Before he runs round the glyptie cycle 
ef the rape of the Palladium, M. Levezow 
gives a fuccin& hiftory of it, from the 
ancient authors who have treated of the 
fame. He afterwards arranges the engrav- 
ed fiones in five claffes, contormably to the 
action which they reprefent. 
The firft clafs exhibits Diomed in the 
laterior of the temple, but before he has 
feized the Palladium. M. Levezow ranks 
five ftones under this clafs ; he has caufed 
figures to be taken of two of them; 
_ Ramely, a fardonyx of the Mufeum of Me- 
dicts, at Florence (Gort, Mus. Flor. Il. 
LXXIV. 2.) and a cornelian which be- 
longed to Mark Antonio Sabbatini, a &guie 
of which appears in Maffei, (Gemm. Ant. 
6g. II. 79) and in Mentfaucon (I. pl. 67, 
No. 12.) &c. 
On Engraved Stoness 
(Nov. t¢ 
The fecond clafs exhibits Diomed at thé 
infant when he is carrying off the Palla- 
dium. It contains fix ftones noticed by 
M. Levezow ; he has caufed figures to - 
be taken of them in pafte from the cabinet 
Stoch. (No. 308.) . 
The third clafs comprehends the ftones 
veherein Diomed, having feized the palla- 
dium, is yet in the interior of the temple. 
This clafs is the mo& important, as well in 
regard to their great number, as in re. 
{pect to the art. M. Levezow here efta- 
blifhes two divifions :—1. Diomed alone ; 
and 2. Diomed accompanied by Ulyfles. 
To the firft divifion belongs, among others, 
the beautiful cornelian engraved by Diof- 
courides; which has given birth to fo many 
different explications, and which was for- 
merly in the cabinet of the kings of 
France. Louis XIV. gave it to his 
daughter, the Princefs de Conti, whe 
transferred it, in the fequel, to her phyfi- 
cian Dodart, from whom it paffed inte 
the hands of his fon-in-law, Homberg; 
and afterwards iftto thofe of the jewel- 
ler Howibeit, who parted with it to M. 
Sevin, counfellor in the parliament of 
Paris, from whom it paffed, finally, inte 
the colleétion of the Duke of Devonhhire. 
On this fubjeét, M. Levezow enters into 
the difcuffions neceflary to eftablifh the 
true explication of this ftone, and to fhew 
whence arife thofe errors which fome au- 
thors have run into, in the explication of 
it. To this firft divifion belongs alfo the 
fardonyx with the name TIOAYKAETOY, 
a figure of which is given by Stofch (plz 
54) and which M. Levezow thinks fliould 
not be attributed to Polycleites of Sicyon, 
but to another Polycleites, an engraver, 
who lived in the time of Auguftus, ‘ 
Among other arguments which he ad- 
duces.in favour of his opinion, in a di- 
greffion which he makes on this fubjeét, 
he obferves that the Greek charaéters of 
the name are precifely fuch as were ule 
in the age of Auguftus, and which differ 
confiderably from thofe which the fculp- 
tor Polycleites would have employed, had 
he been defirous to fet his name on one 
of his own works. He further obferves 
that the refemblance of the name is, by 
no means, a reafon to induce us to fup- 
pofe the identity of the two artiflts ;-bes 
caufe Paufanias (VI. 6.) makes mention 
of a Polycleites of Argos; and becaufe 
Winckelmann, in the’ Preliminary Dif- 
courfe to his Hittory of the Art, takes 
notice of a mofaic found at Pompeii, on 
which is read AIOCKOYPIAHC CAMIOC 
ENOIHCE. 
The fourth clafs exhibits Diomed at the — 
ae inftant 
