116 
your of certain celebrated names, is what 
moft retards the progrefs of the fciences, 
becaufe it prevenis the fe€taries from ex- 
ercifing their own judgment. Many per- 
fons, after having perufed the Travels of 
Anacharfis, fancy themf{-lves acquainted 
with the whole range of Greck antiquities ; 
others think they underftand whatever 
can have any relation to the art, after 
having redd Winckelmann; and others, 
again, repeat the names of thefe celebrat- 
_ ed authors, without having either read or 
meditated their writings. Produétions of 
this nature are, it mutt be acknowledged, 
of great utility in acquiring the rudimenis 
of archeology, but are inadequate to the 
perfect attainment of that feience. 
To form a correét judgment of the me- 
ritof Winckelmann, and to know how far 
he may be confidered as an authority, a 
better guide cannot be made choice of 
than M. Heyne, in the eulogy he beltows 
on his illuftrious friend. In this produc- 
tion he appreciates his works with equal 
tafte and impartiality, maintaiming a hap- 
py medium between the infatuation which 
arifes from mental indolence and a defec- 
tive judgment, and the impiacable feve- 
rity of mediocrity, which endeavours to 
detract from the produfions of genius. 
Accordingly, far from confidering the af- 
fertions of Winckelmann as fo many in- 
conteftable truths, a careful perufal of his 
Hiftory of the Art appears to him to be 
the firtt ftep in the ffudy of antiquities. 
The firft edition of this work appeared 
in 2764. It afterwards ran through fe- 
veral editions, which were reviled, cor- 
rected, and augmented by the author. 
The laft of them was publifhed at Vienna, 
in 1776. It has been tranflated into fe- 
veral languages ; and, in fome inftances, 
the editors, among whom may be cited 
Carlo Fea, in his Italian tranflation, have 
added to it learned commentaries, together 
with notes, in which the correétions made 
by Leffing, Sultzer, and Heyne, are point- 
ed out. 
The aim of this author, in treating of 
the hiftory of the art, has been to give a 
fyftem of the art itfelf. He traces it to 
Its origin in different nations; follows its 
progrcis and variations to its perfect fate ; 
and marks its decline and fall to its ex- 
tinction. In following up this plan, he 
diftinétly difcuffes the art as it fubfifted 
among the Egyptians and Etrufcans ; 
treats it {pecially among the Greeks, as 
conftituting the main obje& of his work ; 
and proceeds thence to the hiftory of the 
art in the rigid acceptation of the term; 
er, in ether words, details the fate it has 
IntroduGtion to the Study of Archeology. 
[Sept 1, 
experienced under different circumftances, 
more efpecially among the Greeks and 
Romans. Relatively to the artifts he gives 
but few hiftorical notices, but points cut 
with much precifion the monuments of 
the art. - 
Heyne, in his courfes of le&tures, fome- 
times follows the analytical, and fome- 
times the chronological method, with 
which he combines the former, as appears 
by the very thort elements he has printed, 
as a guide to his pupils in their ftudies 
and refearches. Thefe elements com- 
mence by general ideas on the art, the 
complete hiftory of which is next traced, 
and its different ‘epochs carefully pointed 
out. This is the objeé& of the chronolegical 
method. They afterwards take up the 
analytical method, and treat particularly 
of feulpture, engraving, and painting; 
but co not make any mention of archi- 
tecture, mofaics, or numifmatics, althongh 
it appears that thefe fubjects oecafionally 
occupy the attention of the author in the 
delivery of his lectures. 
I have already {poken of the fervices 
which Biifching, the geographer, has ren- 
dered archeology, and have noticed his 
analytical treatifes. He likewife publifh- 
ed, in 1782, a general and chronological 
treatife, entitled, a Sketch of the Hiitory 
of the Fine Arts. Inftead of reducing 
the art to a fyflem, founded on hifto- 
rical fa€ts, as has been done by Winckel- 
mann, this author fimply traces, for the 
ufe of bis pupils, a chronological hiftery ° 
of the fine arts, not only among the an- 
cients, but continued to the preient time. 
- The notices he gives are accompanied by 
numerous quotations from the authors 
who go into more ample details on this 
very interefting fubjeé&t. 
Hancarville, whofe extraordinary ad- 
ventures have given him as much celebrity 
as he has acquired by his tafte for the arts 
and antiquities, pubdlifhed m London, in 
1785, a truly original work, in the 
French language, and in three quarto 
volumes, Ona the origin, fpirit, and pro- 
greis of the arts in Greece ; their connec. 
tion with the arts and religion of the 
moit ancient nations on record, and the 
antique monuments of India, Perfia, the 
other parts of Afia, Eurcpe, and Egypt. 
.The author’s principal aim has been to 
inveftigate, by a comparifon cf their mo- 
numeots, the earlieft form of each of the 
objects figured by the different mations. 
He traces in them a primitive type, in 
the fame way as etymologifis find a pri- 
mitive found, in analyfing the words 
of different languages, He next feeks, 
agreeably 
ee ee 
