To facilitate the reader’s appreciation' of the differences betwixt
the heroic and the historic types, the following heads are selected :
F ig . 3 —Heroic type; especially No. 4.48
F ig . 4 — Historic type . F ig . 5. F ig . 6.
L y c u rg u s .49 H E r a t o s th e n e s .50 A l e x a n d e r t h e G r e a t .51
F ig . 7. ' F ig . 8.
P h il ip Arridæus.52 Cleopatra.53
The lineaments of Lycurgus and Eratosthenes, excepting the
heard, are such as those one^meets with daily in our streets ; and the
same applies to th e . other familiar personages whose portraits we
present.
“ Were we to judge solely by the monuments of Greece, on account of the contrast I
have pointed out, we should be tempted to regard the type of the fabulous or heroic personages
as ideal. But imagination more readily creates monsters than models- of beauty ;
and this principle alone will suffice to convince us that it has existed in Greece, anÿ the
countries where its population has spread, if it does not still exist there.”
The learned travellers, MM. d e S t a ck e l b e eg and d e B eo n st e d ,
have journeyed through the Morea, ánd closely investigated the population.
They assert that the heroic type is still extant in certain
localities.54 Here, then, there has been a notable préservation of a
peculiar type — within a small geographical space — through time,
wars, famines, plagues, immigrations, multifaribus foreign conquests;
although the Greeks of the historic type are, out of all proportion,
the mögt abundant at the present day ; which is precisely what,
uncfer the circumstances, an ethnographer would have expected.
á Nul peuple n’a conservé avec plus de fidélité la langue de ses aieux. Nul peuple n’a
conservé plus d’usages, plus de coutumes, plus de souvenirs des temps antiques ; au milieu
d’eux les murs d’Argos, de Mycène et de Tyrinthe, qui déjà du temps d’Homère étaient
d’une haute antiquité, sont encore debout : des Rapsodes parcourent encore le pays, et
chantent avec le même accent et les mêmes paroles, les événements memorables: eux-
mêmes sont l’image de ceux que ces souvenirs rappelent avec tant de force ; et la ressemblance
des traits est rehaussée par la similitude des événements. S’ils ne représentent pas
sous le rapport de la civilisation leurs ancêtres des beaux siècles de la Grèce, ils représentent
ceux qui les ont aménés.”
Of the two types indicated, it is positive, M. Edwards thinks,
that the first (heroic) is pure : but not certain that the second (historic)
is. It may be, that the latter is the result of a mixture of the first
with some other, the elements of which are now unknown to us ;
because it does not seem to be sufficiently uniform to be original.
Albeit, if we set forth with M. Edwards to hunt for the required
elements of modification through Greece, (giving to this name its
most extensiye sense) —
“ We discover a people that has not been sufficiently studied. They speak a language
peculiar to themselves. It is not known whence they come, nor when they established
themselves there. The Albanians seem to be in some respects in Greece, what the Basques
are on the two sides of the Pyrenees, the Brètons in France, the Gaels in England, and
those who speak the Erse in Scotland and Ireland— a remnant of ancient inhabitants.
Why not regard them as such, if it be true that we can find no trace of their foreign origin
in their traditions, history, nor in the comparison of language ? Why may they not be
descendants of the Pelasgi?” [They call themselves “ Skippetar but their Turkish name
is Amaooty~\
This ethnological question of heroic and historic types, mooted by
Edwards, is worthy of careful study ; but we must pass on.