exceed those of an ordinary ring-stone; and it will be found, by observation, that this rule has but very few exceptions, and that almost all intagli of a large size are of a period subsequent to the revival of the art. Of course we except from this rule the large gnostic gems which were intended to be worn on the dress, or to be carried on the person as amulets, and not to be employed as signet-rings. For purposes of ornament to dresses, plate, and jewellery, the Romans preferred precious stones the beauty and value of which consisted in their colour alone, and which were employed uncut; or else camei which their size and style of work rendered effective when viewed from a distance, whereas intagli make no show unless upon a close examination. The finest antique cameo that ever delighted my eyes was a large profile head of Jupiter Dodonæus on Sardonyx, still enclosed in the oxidised iron-setting that had formerly served to fix it upon the cuirass of some Roman general. This custom explains the use of the fine perforation running through the whole width of the stone, so often to be observed in really antique camei, and which is merely of sufficient size to admit a thread for the purpose of affixing the cameo to the dress. But to return to the point noticed at starting. The small size of antique intagli, so observable on looking over any collection, will of itself prove what a striking difference this peculiarity alone makes between them and the works executed after the revival of gem-engraving. Ever since that period, the artists have always preferred stones of considerable magnitude; and their best works are to be seen on gems of larger size than those used for their less important compositions, which is exactly the reverse of the antique practice. Groups of several figures, and representations of well-known historical events, are an almost certain mark of modern work; whilst the drawing of the earlier Cinque-Cento engravers, has all

the quaint and exaggerated character to be found in the paintings on the Majolica of the same period.

Again, antique gems are often of a very irregular form on the back, in fact retaining their natural shape, the edge being merely rounded off for the convenience of setting. This was done to increase the depth of colour of the gem, which would have been lowered had its thickness been diminished. The back of the gem also, although highly polished, will often show traces of deep parallel scratches, occasioned by its having been first rubbed down into shape on a slab of emery, and afterwards brought to a lustrous surface by some peculiar process; whereas modern stones are ground down and polished at once upon the same instrument, a revolving disk of copper moistened with oil, and emery powder, which gives them a perfectly smooth and even surface.

A high degree of polish on the face of the gem, although in itself a suspicious circumstance, does not however infallibly stamp the intaglio as a work of modern times, for it has been the unfortunate practice with jewellers to repolish the surface of a good antique intaglio, in order to remove the scratches and traces of friction which true antiques usually present, so as to make the stone look better as a mere ornament when mounted. This is a most ruinous operation; for besides making the intaglio itself appear of dubious antiquity, it also destroys the perfect outline of the design, by lowering the surface of the stone; and many lamentable instances present themselves of admirable engravings almost entirely spoiled in this way, for the sake of a little outward improvement. On the other hand, a rough and worn surface must not be relied on as an infallible proof of antiquity, for Italian ingenuity has long ago discovered that a handful of new-made gems crammed down a turkey's throat will in a few days, by the trituration of the gizzard, assume a roughness of exterior apparently

produced by the wear of many centuries.' Hence, if a stone has too rough a surface, it requires to be examined still more carefully, as affording good grounds for suspicion by its exaggerated ostentation of antiquity. In a word, though Faith may be the cardinal virtue of the theologian, Distrust ought to be that of every gem-collecter; so beset is he, at every step, by the most ingenious frauds, devised and carried out by the roguery and dexterity of three centuries.

Again, though the stone itself may be antique, yet it may have been used as the vehicle of another species of deception, and that the most difficult to guard against of any that I know. It is a common practice of Italian engravers to get antique gems bearing inferior intagli upon them, and to retouch, or sometimes to work over again entirely, the whole design; thus producing an apparently antique intaglio of a good style, upon a stone the appearance of which lulls to sleep all suspicion. This is the most common fraud of modern times, and one against which the only safeguard is the careful examination, with a lens, of the entire intaglio; when, if some portions of the work bear a fresher and higher polish than others, and, above all, if they are sunk deeper into the stone than is required by the exigencies of the design, a shrewd guess be hazarded that this deception has been practised. Dealers, for their own purposes, foster a belief in their customers, that a high polish in the interior of the intaglio is a sure proof of its antiquity; but this doctrine is altogether false, for all the good Italian engravers give to their works an internal polish fully equal to that of the antique. It merely requires the expenditure of a little extra time and labour in working over the interior of the cutting with a

may

The effects of this treatment are very observable in many of the Poniatowski gems.

leaden point charged with fine diamond powder. Another popular notion is, that soft wax will not adhere so readily to antique as to modern intagli, but this circumstance merely depends upon the relative degree of polish of the stones. The truest test of antiquity (leaving out the question of art for a subsequent discussion), appears to me to be a certain degree of dulness, like the mist produced by breathing on a polished surface, which the lapse of ages has always cast upon the high lustre of the interior of the intaglio. This appearance is not to be imitated by any contrivance of the modern forger, and, when once remarked, is so peculiar in itself, as to be easily recognized ever afterwards. So constant is this peculiarity in works of genuine antiquity, that its absence is always to be regarded as very unfavourable to the authenticity of any intaglio. The effect also of the real wear and tear of time upon the surface of the stone, is rather a fine roughness, like that of ground-glass, than the deep scratches and indentations produced by the violent methods of the dealers, or, as they are justly styled by Pliny, "mangones gemmarum," personages whose reputation for honesty was precisely the same in his time as it is at the present day. Again, a very satisfactory proof of antiquity is found when the engraving appears to have been executed almost entirely with the diamond-point; that is to say, when all the hollows seem cut into the stone by a succession of little scratches repeated one upon the other, while the deeper parts of the design show that they have been sunk by means of the drill, a tool with a blunt and rounded point, producing a succession of hemispherical hollows of various dimensions. Some intagli even occur, entirely scratched into the stone by means of the diamond-point alone, especially the works in shallow relief of the Etruscan and early Greek epoch; and, as a general rule, according to the observation of the famous gem-engraver

Natter, the extensive use of the diamond-point is the great distinction between the antique and the modern art. The word itself, scalpere, used by the Romans to express the process of engraving on gems, signifies to scratch, and, in itself, supplies a proof of the manner in which the work was carried on when first introduced to their notice; and the Greek technical term yapew has the same primary signification. The use of the diamond-point is particularly observable in the execution of the hair of portraits, when of good work of almost every epoch of antiquity, where it produces an admirable and natural effect which cannot be given by the modern instruments. Of these latter it may be proper to say a few words in this place. The principal among them, by means of which all the above named operations, both of producing lines and hollowing out depressions in the design, are carried out, is the Wheel, a minute disk of copper fixed on the end of a spindle, which is put into rapid motion by a kind of lathe. The fine edge of this tool, moistened with oil and emery or diamond dust, speedily cuts into the hardest gems, and by repeating and prolonging the lines thus produced, the minuter portions of the design are executed. The larger and deeper hollows are still sunk by means of a round pointed drill, substituted for the cutting disk, and acting just as the ancient drill, which last, however, appears to have been always worked by the hand, by means of a bow, in the same way as the similar tool still used by jewellers. The modern method, though greatly expediting the operation - for Mariette speaks of Smart, a celebrated English engraver of the last century, finishing several good portraits in one day -yet renders the operation more mechanical and stiff, whereas the ancient scalptor, working with his diamond-point, like the etcher with his needle, had all the freedom of hand and boldness of the latter artist.