first, it is not for us to say: we leave this point to be settled by Welcker, who has written two books on these subjects, and advocated both sides;* only remarking that Hermann and Gruppe place the Suppliants first. As to the Seven against Thebes, doctors do agree with an unanimity which is quite wonderful, that it is the second play of a connected trilogy; arguing from the hooks and eyes in it, the references to things which have gone before, and the preparation for something to come after. Of the former description is the reference by Eteocles to his ominous dream about the division of the heritage (v. 710 seq.) which would, probably, have been more explicit if it had not been mentioned before; to which Hermann adds (vv. 571-575) the abuse heaped upon Tydeus, which contains so many particular allusions that it must refer to something also before mentioned. Of the latter, we have the prohibition to bury the corpse of Polynices, at the end of the play, and the announcement by Antigoné and the semi-chorus which takes her part, of their determination to bury it. Again, Hermann remarks that, in the Seven, only Eteocles and Polynices are dead, and the city, so far, safe: so that the event, with the fate of the six remaining chiefs, is yet to be told: and this latter point, according to Plutarch, was the subject of the Eleusinians (Fragm. 48), which he (and upon second thoughts Welcker also) places third in his trilogy: but here we suffer from the embarras des richesses: here are two separate plots furnished us for the third play, which are undoubtedly incompatible with each other. Let any one read over The Antigoné of Sophocles, and The Suppliants of Euripides for these, making allowance for difference of handling, furnish the two plots in question-and judge whether it would be possible to combine, in one Greek tragedy, the burial of Polynices and its results at Thebes, and the obsequies of the allied chiefs at Eleusis. Doubtless either one or the other plot might have formed a sequel to that of the Seven; but the subject of the Seven is actually so handled as to exclude any sequel which does not strictly pertain to the family of Edipus: the farewell speeches at the end of this play cannot be reconciled with the supposition that the next is to turn on the fortunes of the Six Chiefs, or on anything except the burial of Polynices. Lastly, we come to the Prometheus; and, looking at Dindorf's edition, we find the Prometheus Bound extant, and the names and fragments of a Prometheus Freed, and a Prometheus zugpogos (fire-bringer), or πugnaɛús (fire-lighter). A satyric play, called Prometheus Tupnaɛús, belonged to the same tetralogy with the *Die Eschyl. Trilogie, p. 390; Die Griechischen Tragoedien, vol. i. p. 48. Hermann, Opusc. vol. ii. p. 319, seq.: Gruppe, Ariadne, p. 72, seq. Persians; Persians; so that we have no right to take this into consideration: to this must be referred Fragm. 175, where the making of a torch is described, and 176, wherein a satyr, ignorant as yet of the properties of fire, is represented as in danger of singeing his beard by embracing it. But, if we examine the authorities, we shall not find that the editor is at all justified in identifying the πυρφόρος with the πυρκαεύς. The names are both mentioned by different authors, and different fragments quoted from them-of which those which are referred to the Tugxasús have a decidedly satyric complexion, which cannot be said of anything that we know of the πυρφόρος. But, says Dindorf, • Πυρκαεύς parum aptum Prometheo nomen: aptissimum uppópos.' What? was there nothing in connexion with Prometheus of the nature of a πυρκαϊά ? * Have we never heard of a Feast of Lamps, a torchrace in honour of Prometheus, as god of fire and the arts therewith connected, in conjunction with Hephaestus and Athena? † This name is assuredly not at variance with the worship of Prometheus-not with the old Attic national religion-not, finally, with the fragment which describes the making of an oakum torch. But it is wholly at variance with the other name :-for the Tuppópos θεός, Τιτὰν Προμηθεύς, was and could be none else than the Giver of Fire; and little as we know of this play, the fragment which Gellius quotes, with the remark that it was almost word for word the same with a passage in the Ino of Euripides, may therefore fairly be presumed to be tragic (Fragm. 174). To the same play we may probably refer Fragment 362, which alludes to Pandora. But it is at least questionable whether Fragment 289, which expresses some one's dread of dying a silly night-moth's death, should not rather be connected with Fragment 176, as belonging to the πυρκαεύς. Enough has been said to disprove the supposed identity between the two. And if there ever was a case in which it was justifiable to assume positively the existence of a connected trilogy, where only one play is extant, it is this-where the three names, Sophocles wrote a tragedy, called Nauplius vexatus, of which the plot was, that Nauplius, during the storm which the Greeks encountered on the southern coast of Euboea, revenged the death of his son Palamedes by lighting torches as signals to draw their vessels on the fatal headland of Caphareus. Senec., Agam. 566, -Clarum manu Lumen nefandâ vertice e summo efferens, In saxa duxit perfidâ classem face.' Hygin. cxvi. Tanquam auxilium eis afferret, facem ardentem eo loco extulit, quo saxa acuta, et locus periculosissimus erat.'-See Griechische Tragoedien, i. p. 184, seq. + See Dr. Smith's Dictionary of Antiquities, Art. Aaμradndgoμía, VOL. LXX. NO. CXL. 2 A The The Fire-bringer, The Bound, and The Freed, combine to tell the whole tale of the Titan's fortunes, as we have them narrated in the mythological writers. The names themselves are sufficient to show (as soon as we have rid ourselves of the fancy that The Fire-bringer was a satyric play) that they form a harmonious whole; the theme of the first being the theft of fire by Prometheus; that of the second the living death to which he was doomed; and the third representing his reconciliation with Zeus, and his liberation. The chorus of the extant play (v. 555) say that now in his misfortunes they have quite another strain to sing from that which they once sang in honour of his nuptials with their sister Hesioné. This seems to make it certain that the same ocean nymphs formed the chorus in the first and second plays, and that the first contained and, if so, probably ended with-his marriage to Hesioné. And again, the whole plot of the extant play implies that the noble theft of fire was the subject of the foregoing one. Indeed, under any other supposition we shall be at a loss to explain the slight way in which this is mentioned, and assumed as known, in the second play. The gift of fire was emphatically the merit (or demerit) of Prometheus; by the ancients all the arts are traced to the possession of this πάντεχνον πῦρ ; yet there is not much stress laid upon it, and very little description given of it. All this points to a former play, in which the subject had been more elaborately treated and prominently set forth-whereas less notice, it may be, had been taken of the other secondary gifts which are detailed along with that of fire in the Prometheus Bound. We will now conclude with a brief analysis of the argument for the trilogy, which Welcker has drawn out from these and other data, in the work called 'The Trilogy Prometheus,' named fifth at the head of this article; of course without pledging ourselves to all his details (some of which he has indeed since recanted), but certainly considering it an able, and, in its most im portant features, a highly probable piece of constructive criticism. The first play, according to this theory, opens at the very forge of Hephaestus, the Lemnian volcano Moschylus; from whence Prometheus steals the spark, and afterwards parleys with the firegod on the tyranny of Zeus, the state of the human race, the arts in esse and in posse, and, in short, things in general; while the smith stands with his hammer, thus, The whilst his iron does on the anvil cool, the speculations of the crafty Titan; who, after having thus gained his object, returns to solemnise his nuptials; and with this pageant the first play, Prometheus the Fire-Bringer, concludes so as to form form the highest contrast with his position at the opening of the second, or Prometheus Bound. If we are persuaded to believe that this second refers us back to such a first play as has been sketched out, it carries us forward with far more certainty to the third, Prometheus Freed. The coming events have so thrown their shadows before that there is no mistaking them. Prometheus has registered his vow to keep the fateful secret of which he is the depository, until he is set at liberty. Again, the introduction of Io has elicited the prophecy (v. 871), that one of her descendants shall release him. We are to suppose, then, that after a long series of years (thirty thousand, according to Schol. Prom. V., v. 94), Prometheus is brought back from Tartarus, with the eagle preying on his liver. Time and suffering have now bowed the Titan's heart: while his constancy has wearied out the inveteracy of his tormentor. All, therefore, is ripe for a compromise. Hercules appears to shoot the eagle. The Titans are present in full chorus to console their brother. Prometheus and Hercules hold high converse, during which the wanderings and labours of the hero (as those of Io in the extant play) are prophesied. Chiron, who, though immortal, had been incurably wounded by one of the poisoned arrows of Hercules, offers to satisfy Destiny by surrendering his helpless eternity of suffering, and becoming the substitute of Prometheus in the nether world. Zeus sets Prometheus at liberty, on the condition (for he, too, had sworn an oath) that he always wears, as nominal bonds and symbols of captivity, a wreath of the agnus castus,* and an iron ring made from the metal of his fetters. The secret is then revealed, that a son more mighty than his father is to be born of Thetis, whom Zeus is at that time wooing. On this she is condemned to marry Peleus; and at their nuptial feast, where all the gods are present, Prometheus sits, the reconciled friend and honoured guest of Zeus, ' Extenuata gerens veteris vestigia pœnæ, Quam quondam, silici restrictus membra catena, *Eschyl. Fragm. 219, Τῷ δὲ ξένῳ γε στέφανος, ἀρχαῖον στέφος, δεσμῶν ἄριστος, ἐκ Προμηθέως λύγου, as must be read for you, according to the certain correction of Heyne: compare Fragm. 190, and Athenæus, pp. 671, seq. Catullus, Epithalamium Pelei et Thetidos (lxiv. 296). ART. III. The Coltness Collections, M. DC. VIII.— M.DCCC.XL.; Printed for the Maitland Club. Edinburgh. 4to. 1842. 1842. pp. 437. THE THE example of the Bannatyne Club, instituted at Edinburgh in 1823 for the printing of MSS. illustrative of Scottish history and antiquities, was followed speedily by some gentlemen of Glasgow and the neighbouring counties, who formed the Maitland Club on an exactly similar scale of expense, but undertook especially the preservation of documents connected with their own part of the country. The two clubs print their books in the same shape-handsome quartos; and they have from the beginning acted on the principle of submitting to each other a specimen of every work about to be sent to the press, and allowing additional copies to be thrown off for the members of the sister association, if these desire to have them. Each club has now put forth several scores of volumes; and though we are far from thinking that all the MSS. patronised by either deserved to be printed at length, or even in abridgment, there is no doubt that out of their two collections a highly curious library of Scottish antiquarian miscellanies may already be arranged on the shelves of any judicious subscriber. Their influence was soon felt on this side of the Tweed; and both here in London, and in several of the English counties, institutions of much the same character have met with ready support. As far as we know, the Southern clubs of recent origin affect less of luxury in the style of their imprints. The Camden, for example, produces quartos of much smaller size, and gives more matter (and good matter too) at a far less annual cost. And the Grainger, whose peculiar object is the engraving of historical and family portraits (with brief biographical accompaniments), deserves to be more particularly recommended for the extreme moderation of its demands on the purses of its members. We are of opinion that the Scotch clubs ought to have adopted from the first the plan of a double series of bookspresenting works of general importance in one form, and things of inferior or more limited interest in another. By and bye, if they continue to go on and prosper, the accumulation of these bulky quartos will become alarming, even in a good-sized country house. It is to be observed, that, though the annual subscription even for these Scotch clubs is not heavy, they seem to expect that every member shall sooner or later print some one book at his own expense, and present it to the Society. The slenderest volume thus given in either of these collections could not have been printed for less than 50l. The majority must have cost 1007. each at the least; and not a few have been produced at a much |