weight to this opinion, if fome characteristical mark could be pointed out on the coin peculiar to the fcriptural history of the flood, and not applicable to that of Deucalion. And fuch at first fight appear to be the two birds, one reprefented fitting on the ark, the other flying towards it with a branch in its claws; provided that the former be fuppofed a raven, and the latter a dove; because both are mentioned as having been fent out by Noah to difcover whether the waters were abated; but on the other hand, it cannot be afferted, that the former is intended for a raven; and if it were, medalifts have found an allufion from the blackness of that bird to the antient name of Apamea, which according to Pliny was firft called Celænæ, and according to Stephanus Κελαιναι. The eagle alfo (for fo Harduin thinks it to be) was an emblem of this city, and appears on its medals, and the bird on the wing resembles an eagle on Severus's medaillon, though in Philip's it is more like a dove. But thefe two birds are equivocal emblems, for according to Plutarch the dove attended Deucalion, and was a token to him of the encreafing tempeft by his return to the ark, and of fair weather when he came back no more; and Abydenus, as quoted by Eufebius in relation to that deluge, fpeaks of birds in the plural as thrice fent out by Sifuthrus. The branch, indeed, is not taken notice of by any profane historian, and the Mofaical account reprefents only a leaf in the bird's mouth. The tradition of the Deucalionic flood being fuppofed more recent, and better preserved in the minds of the heathen, by forming a remarkable æra in their history of the world, was a more probable object of their attention; efpecially when it is confidered, that many fuch allufions to different parts of profane hiftory are to be found on their coins; but the reprefentation of Noah's flood would be a fingle inftance of fcripture history recorded on a heathen medal. It is with the greatest diffidence that I prefume to doubt any opinion advanced by that moft learned and ingenious author, whose Analysis of Antient Mythology has enriched the public with fuch a treasure of learning; and who, with a goodnefs of heart equal to the extent of his abilities, has applied them to illuftrate many important truths revealed in facred hiftory. As he wanted not various and abundant proofs of this event, he may well be juftified in illuftrating his other arguments by the mention of the Apamean coin of Philip; but as his reafoning, fo far as the letters on the ark are concerned, was founded on the fuppofed authenticity of this coin, for which he ought not to be made anfwerable; the cafe may poffibly now appear to him in a different light; at leaft he will only draw his conclufions from the number, attitude, &c. of the figures on the reverie: and, though the words NES and NNE, under the conduct of his able pen, may be taught to fpeak the fame language. yet the addition of a final K feems to determine the word to a different meaning; and instead of conveying the name of a deity, or a patriarch, points out a title or office belonging to the city where the medal was ftruck. This objection may be thought of more confequence than a difquifition concerning the form of the ark, as reprefented on the medal, whether it be intended to reprefent a fquare or quinque lateral veffel; whether it be open at top, or covered with a flat or angular rcof. Mr. Bryant's reprefentation undoubtedly differs from thofe in the Muleum Florentinum, the French king's cabinet, and the Numifmata Pembrochiana, wherein they are all faithfully reprefented from the original engravings; but he cannot be charged with any confiderable deviation from Falconeri's engraving, which probably was his archetype. The difference confifts chiefly in this, that the defcending line, which is drawn in Mr. Bryant's plate from the back of the ark, and is loft behind the second figure, forms a larger angle with the fide or end line of the ark, than it does in Falconeri's, and therefore conveys the idea of an angular roof; whereas that line in Falconeri approaches fo near to a perpendicular, that it may feem to the eye rather as the end in perspective of an open boat or veffel, whofe fides are of equal height. It is evident, however, from Falconeri's defcription of the coin, that the tranfverfe line refting on what he calls the duo tigilli erecti, was underftood by him to reprefent a covering over the heads of the figures; and therefore it feems immaterial whether that roof was flat or angular: nor, indeed, can any fatisfactory conclufion be drawn from the delineation of the purious coin of Philip, nor even from the three different reprefentations of the genuine medaillon of Severus, which, in fome in ftances, vary from each other. I would extend this obfervation even to the coin itself, whereon the accuracy or fkill of a mintmafter cannot much be depended on, according to whofe ideas and miferable perspective, the fame figure might reprefent an open or a covered building, a boat or an ark, a fuggeftum or a temple; efpecially on the coins minted during the latter part of the empire, in the Afiatic provinces. Nor does it feem material to enquire into the fize of the ark, or the number of perfons represented without or within it; for it was not the intention, much lefs was it within the capacity of the mintmafter, to include fuch a variety of facts or perfonages within the narrow compaís of a fingle reverse. It was thought fuficient, if he could mark the historical fact by one or two leading and well known circumftances; fo that if the Noachic deluge had been the object of his work, he could not have defcribed all the perfons contained in that veffel; much lefs could he have found room for the variety of animals preferved in it. The reftoration of mankind, whether by Noah's or Deucalion's flood, was juftly depicted in the perfons of a male and female, whom history has pointed out as the parents of the poftdiluvian world. They are reprefented in one part of the reverfe in an ark floating on the wa ters, in another part as juft landed from it, with uplifted hands, in thankfulness to the deity for their prefervation. of the prefervation. The repetition of the figures, far from being an objection to either of thofe hiftories, feems rather to give an additional illuftration to the coin, and to afcertain afcertain the fact, by exhibiting nies of religion, and the events of the two perfons in different fituations. This liberty is fometimes taken in hiftorical paintings, and the fame figure appears in various parts of the picture. But whether the faced or profane hiftory of the deluge was the object of this reverse, the word in fcribed on the ark will be of very little ufe in explaining the figures. For, according to Vaillant, the word NEOK must be fubftituted inftead of NNE. The Abbé Barthelemy thinks that authority is wanting for both, and that neither of the words can be fairly traced on any of the genuine medals with this reverse; fo that, NOE appearing only on the fpurious medaillon of Philip, it will be to no purpofe to contend for it, either as the name of the patriarch, or, according to Mr. Barrington, as the dual of the pronoun EI, put into the mouths of Deucalion and Pyrrha, to exprefs their fituation, and alluding to that paffage in Ovids's Metam. lib. i. "Nos duo turba fumus." For it is apprehended that this pronoun is always fpelt with an I, and therefore, until fome authority can be produced, either from MSS. or printed books, of its being written with an E, neither the fpelling nor the meaning here given, can be justified from the Greek language. It is also well known to all thofe who are converfant with medals, that they hardly ever fpeak a language like this. The office of the mint-mafters was of a public and ferious nature. They were employed in reprefenting the ceremo hiftory, in the plaineft and most intelligible manner, for the public information; and, though they might be tolerable mythologists, yet they could have nothing to do with poetry. It may be just matter of doubt, whether the name or writings of Ovid were known to the Apameans, fituated at 500 miles diftance from Tomis, the place of that poet's refidence. It may be thought ftill lefs probable, that they fhould be fo familiarifed to his works as to allude to them on fo remarkable an event by the application of a fingle pronoun, whicht did not convey fo much informa tion as might be learned from the number and attitude of the figures themfelves; but this, being only matter of opinion, mult be referred to the judgment of the reader. But is there no other event to which thefe medals wight refor? were there no religious or hiftorical facts relative to Apamea, the circumftances of which may not have been tranfmitted to pofterity, though they were well known at that time to the Apameans? Is any thing more frequent on the medals of the Afiatic cities than the reprefentation of their local deities, temples, images, altars, and ceremonies of worship? Why may not the building reprefent a temple dedicated to fome marine or river deities, fituated, as the coin reprefents it, at the confluence of, or upon the Apamean rivers, with the images of those deities in the temple? and may not the figures ftanding near the temple reprefent Worshippers, Priests, Editui or Newxogo, efpecially as one of them is veiled like a priest, and and their right-hands are lifted up in the pofture of adoration or thanksgiving May not this have been a celebrated temple, for which games were inftituted in the ceremonial of their worship, under the presidency of an Ayaxshira; and to which, on fuch a fuppofition, the title of Newgw might be applicable. But, as nothing can be produced from hiftory, from the state of these medals, or from their legends, to determine precifely the fact to which they allude, there is ftill ample room left for further conjecture; the principal object of this paper having been to fhew the different flate of the medals under confideration, to diftinguish the fpurious from the genuine coins, and rather to fhew what confequences cannot be drawn, than to establish any certain ones, on fo difficult a subject. But whatever thefe may be, it seems neceffary that they fhould be deduced from the figures and legend on the Contour only, which are allowed by the best medalifts to be genuine. On the Antiquity of Cock Fighting. EN have long availed themfelves of the antipathy one cock fhews to another, and have encouraged that natural hatred with arts that difgrace human reafon. -The origin of this fport is faid to be derived from the Athenians on the following occafion: When Themistocles was marching his army against the Perfians, he by the way elpying two cocks fighting, caufed his army to behold them, and made the following. fpeech to them: "Behold, these do not fight for their household gods, for the monuments of their ancestors, nor for glory, nor for liberty, nor for the safety of their children, but only because the one will not give way unto the other." This fo encouraged the Grecians, that they fought ftrenuoufly, and obtained the victory over the Perfians; upon which cock-fighting was by a particular law ordained to be annually practifed by the Athenians. Though the ancient Greeks piqued themfelves on their politeneis, calling all other nations barbarous, yet Mr. Pegge has proved clearly in a Treatife published in the third volume of the Archæologia, that they were the authors of this cruel and inhuman mode of diverfion. The inhabitants of Delos were great lovers of this sport ; and Tanagra, a city of Bootia, the Ifle of Rhodes, Chalcis in Euboa, and the country of Media, were famous for their generous and magnanimous race of chickens.It appears they had fome method of preparing the birds for battle. Cock-fighting was an inftitution partly religious, and partly political at Athens, and was continued there for the purpose of improving the feeds of valour in the minds of their youths-But it was afterwards abufed and perverted, both there and in other parts of Greece, to a common paftime and amuse-, ment, without any moral, ¡political, or religious intention; and as it is now followed and practifed amongst us.-It appears that the Romans, who borrowed this, with many other things, from Greece, ufed * ufed quails as well as cocks for fighting-The firft caufe of contention between the two brothers, Baffianus and Geta, fons of the Emperor Septimius Severus, happened, according to Herodian, in their youth, about fighting their quails and cocks +. Cocks and quails, fitted for the purpose of engaging one another to the laft gafp, for diverfion, are frequently compared in the Roman writers t, and with much propriety, to Gladiators. The fathers of the church inveigh with great warmth against the fpectacles of the Arena-the wanton fhedding of human blood in fport-One would have thought that with this, cock-fighting would also have been discarded, under the mild and humane genius of Christianity But it was referved for this enlightened æra to practise it with new and aggravating circumstances of cruelty-The Shrove Tuesday maacre of this useful and fpirited creature, is now indeed in a declining way; but that monftrous barbarity, the battle-royal and Welsh-main ftill continue to be in full force amongst us.-A ftriking difgrace to the manly character of Britons ! reign of Henry II. is the first of our writers that mentions cocking, defcribing it as the sport of schoolboys on Shrove Tuesday. The theatre (the cockpit) it feems was the fchool, and the mafter was the comptroller and director of the fport.-From this time, at least, the diverfion, however abfurd, and even impious, was continued amongst us: It was followed, though difapproved and prohibited 39 Edward III.--Alfo in the reign of Henry VIII. and A. D. 1569. It has been by fome called a royal diverfion; and every one knows the cockpit at Whitehall was erected by a crowned head, for the more magnificent celebrating of the sport. It was prohibited however by one of Oliver's acts, March 31, 1654 Hence Marcus Aurelius, 1 fect. 6. fays, "I learn from Diognetus," ne rebus manibus ftudium impenderem, ne Coturnices ad pugnam altrem, neve rehus iftiufmodi animum adjicerem. Interque fe fratres diffidebant pueriliprimum` certamine, edendis Cotornicum pugnis, Gallinaceorumque conflictibus, ac puerorum colluctationibus exorta difcordia. Herodian. III. Sect. 33. Hence Pliny's expreffion, Gallorum, feu Gladiatorum, and that of Columella, rixofarum Avium lanifta-Lanifta being the proper term for the master of the Gladiators. redness |